Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSixth Street 14650HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY ( #74) IDENTIFICATION 1. Common name: Nardie House 2. Historic name: None 3. Street or rural address: 14650 Sixth Street City: Saratoga Zip: 95070 County: Santa Clara 4. Parcel number: 517 -08 -04 5. Present Owner: Michael & Carol Mauldin Address: 15345 Bohlman Rd. City: Saratoga Zip: 95070 Ownership is: Public: Private: X 6. Present Use: Office Original Use: Residence DESCRIPTION 7a. Architectural style: Queen Anne Cottage 7b. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site or structure and describe any major alterations from its original condition: This is a simple Queen Anne Cottage which features a single gabled bay window on the right side of the entrance. The only decorative work is under the gable end where a typical shingle pattern in horizontal rows of alternating diamonds and squares appears. This house has recently been renovated and has been raised several feet to make space for the parking underneath. The house has lost none of its architectural integrity and, in fact, is now an asset to the neighborhood. Other architectural features include double -hung wood sash, bevel -edged horizontal plank siding and a simple pattern in stained glass in the center front window of the front bay. (photograph here) 8. Construction date: Estimated: 1895 Factual: 9. Architect: Unknown 10. Builder: Unknown 11. Approx. prop. size Frontage: 50' Depth: 50' approx. acreage 12. Date(s) of enclosed photograph(s): 1988 13. Condition: Excellent: X Good: Fair: Deteriorated: No longer in existence: 14. Alterations: House raised for parking underneath. 15. Surroundings: (Check more than one if necessary) Open land: Scattered buildings: Densely built -up: X Residential: X Industrial: Commercial: X Other: 16. Threats to site: None known: X Private development: Zoning: Vandalism: Public Works project: Other: 17. Is the structure: On its original site? X Moved? Unknown? 18. Related features: SIGNIFICANCE 19. Briefly state historical and /or architectural importance (include dates, events, and persons associated with the site). This c. 1895 residence is one of the last structures of its style in the Saratoga Village area; its main historic significance is its rarity. The house originally sat on a 50' x 150' lot that ran from Lumber Street (now Big Basin Way) up Sixth Street. The property was purchased by John Henry from the McCartys in 1869. It was sold in 1890 to Larry Wallace, who owned the local feed store. It changed ownership several times before 1944, when the rear 50' x 50' portion (on which this house sits) was subdivided off by the Hales. It is named the Nardie House for owners prior to the current owner. The house was rehabilitated in 1987, for conversion from a residence to an office. The house was raised to allow for parking underneath, but still maintains its architectural integrity. 20. Main theme of the historic resource: (If more than one is checked, number in order of importance.) Architecture: X Arts /Leisure: Economic /Industrial: Exploration /Settlement: Government: Military: Religion: Social /Ed.: 21. Sources (List books, documents, surveys, personal interviews and their dates). Interviews with Melita Oden, Eugenie Sabatin, and Anna Loze, 1986 -87. 22. Date form prepared: 4/88 By (name): SHPC Organization: City of Saratoga Address: 13777 Fruitvale Ave. City: Saratoga Zip: 95070 Phone: 867 -3438 Locational sketch map (draw and label site and surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks): NORTH Ol u i T t r 7 � ArJe' Ell of �A�9 �; CITY of = ' ATOGA . �tl % 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA. CALIFORNIA 95070 �����9 (408) 867 -3438 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson Martha Clevenger July 13, 1988 Joyce Hlava David Moyles Donald Peterson Carol Mauldin 14650 Sixth Street Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Ms. Mauldin: The Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission is pleased to inform you that we have recently completed the Heritage Resource Inventory of important historic buildings in Saratoga. As one of Saratoga's Designated Heritage Resources ( #HP -11), the Nardie House is automatically included in the Inventory. Enclosed is a list of the entire Inventory and the individual Inventory form for your property which gives information about the building, the property and its history. We would appreciate your review of this form to let us know if there are any changes or additions your wish to include. If you have any questions, please direct them to the Commission through Valerie Young, our staff person at City Hall (867- 3438). Sincerely, Members of the Heritage Preservation Commission Elizabeth Ansnes Roy Cameron Norm oepernik Shar n andsness Bar arVoester /' en Heid, Chairma HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY ( #74) IDENTIFICATION 1. Common name: Nardie House 2. Historic name: None 3. Street or rural address: 14650 Sixth Street City: Saratoga Zip: 95070 County: Santa Clara 4. Parcel number: 517 -08 -04 5. Present Owner: Michael & Carol Mauldin Address: 15345 Bohlman Rd. City: Saratoga Zip: 95070 Ownership is: Public: Private: X 6. Present Use: Office Original Use: Residence DESCRIPTION 7a. Architectural style: Queen Anne Cottage 7b. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site or structure and describe any major alterations from its original condition: This is a simple Queen Anne Cottage which features a single gabled bay window on the right side of the entrance. The only decorative work is under the gable end where a typical shingle pattern in horizontal rows of alternating diamonds and squares appears. This house has recently been renovated and has been raised several feet to make space for the parking underneath. The house has lost none of its architectural integrity and, in fact, is now an asset to the neighborhood. Other architectural features include double -hung wood sash, bevel -edged horizontal plank siding and a simple pattern in stained glass in the center front window of the front bay. (photograph here) 8. Construction date: Estimated: 1895 Factual: 9. Architect: Unknown X10. Builder: Unknown 11. Approx. prop. size Frontage: 50' Depth: 50' approx. acreage 12. Date(s) of enclosed photograph(s): 1988 13. Condition: Excellent: X Good: Fair: Deteriorated: No longer in existence: 14. Alterations: House raised for parking underneath. 15. Surroundings: (Check more than one if necessary) Open land: Scattered buildings: Densely built -up: X Residential: X Industrial: Commercial: X Other: 16. Threats to site: None known: X Private development: Zoning: Vandalism: Public Works project: Other: 17. Is the structure: On its original site? X Moved? Unknown? 18. Related features: SIGNIFICANCE 19. Briefly state historical and /or architectural importance (include dates, events, and persons associated with the site). This c. 1895 residence is one of the last structures of its style in the Saratoga Village area; its main historic significance is its rarity. The house originally sat on a 50' x 150' lot that ran from Lumber Street (now Big Basin Way) up Sixth Street. The property was purchased by John Henry from the McCartys in 1869. It was sold in 1890 to Larry Wallace, who owned the local feed store. It changed ownership several times before 1944, when the rear 50' x 50' portion (on which this house sits) was subdivided off by the Hales. It is named the Nardie House for owners prior to the current owner. The house was rehabilitated in 1987, for conversion from a residence to an office. The house was raised to allow for parking underneath, but still maintains its architectural integrity. 20. Main theme of the historic resource: (If more than one is checked, number in order of importance.) Architecture: X Arts /Leisure: Economic /Industrial: Exploration /Settlement: Government: Military: Religion: Social /Ed.: 21. Sources (List books, documents, surveys, personal interviews and their dates). Interviews with Melita Oden, Eugenie Sabatin, and Anna Loze, 1986 -87. 22. Date form prepared: 4/88 By (name): SHPC Organization: City of Saratoga Address: 13777 Fruitvale Ave. City: Saratoga Zip: 95070 Phone: 867 -3438 Locational sketch map (draw and label site and surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks): —� NORTH d. u i T it z 7 k je. s� w C AGENDA BILL NO. ! x,� .Initial Dept. hd. .6A DATE: 11/27/85 (12/4/85) C. Atty.- DEPARTMENT: Community Development C. Mgr. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - ------------ SUBJECT: HP -11, Ordinance Designating Nardie Home at 14650 6th Street as a Heritage Resource ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- ISSUE SUrDiARY 1. Mr. & Mrs. Mauldin submitted an application for Heritage Resource Designation prepared for the Nardie home at 14650 6th St. 2. The Commission has determined that the Nardie Home meets the criteria for Heritage Resources per Ordinance No. 66. 3. If this designation is approved, all proposed modifications to the Nardie Home would have to be reviewed by the Commission. RECOMMENDATION 1. The Heritage Preservation Commission recommends that the City Council approve an ordinance designating the Nardie Home as a Heritage Resource. 2. To adopt this ordinance, the Council must make the necessary findings at the time of the ordinance's first reading. 3. A second reading of the ordinance would be required at the next Council Meeting. The ordinance would go into effect 30 days after the second reading. FISCAL IMPACTS - None anticipated EXHIBITS /ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. HP -11 2. Application and Commission Report /Findings 3. Minutes of Heritage Preservation meeting of 11/6/85 COUNCIL ACTION 12/4: Continued to 1/15. 1/15: Continued to 2/19. 2/19: Introduced ordinance. C ORDINANCE NO. HP -11 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE NARDIE HOME (APN 517 -8 -4) AS A HERITAGE RESOURCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: After careful review and consideration of the report of the Heritage Preservation Commission, the application and supporting materials, the City Council has determined that the findings per Exhibit "B" can be made and hereby designates the property known as the Nardie Home. SECTION ,2: ..This designation shall become operative and take effect thirty (30) days from its date of passage. This ordinance was regularly introduced and after the waiting time required by law was thereafter passed and adopted this day of , 1985, by the following vote: C AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST; CITY CLERK MAYOR j,, e v RECEIVED C�" OCT 2 4 1985 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT i CatA_ eived 10-24-85 Designation NkD - HP -11 Meeting Date Fee (No fee for designation only) CITY OF SARATOGA HERITAGE RESOURCE DESIGNATION /PERMIT APPLICATION FORM I. Identification of Heritage Resource A. Name 1) Common Name 2) Historic Name -NONE - B. Location /Address 14650 6th Street SARATOGA C. Assessor's Parcel Number 517 -8 -4 D. Use of Sitc Rental Residence 1) Original Residence E. Present Owner Elizabeth Nardie (.Please attach-documentation of ownership) C ur 1) Address S kiti� iL V pa 2) Phone Number S'G _ p' e J 3) Public or Private Ownership iu,iY 4) Has Owner been Notified of Application? y=a. -Purpose of Application �l A. Application for Designation or P9rmit? Designation If application for pe,:init . ;i1.cf'y 'es­rl.be - PrcT sal :d �� ✓� alteration,; required. -see attachment- B. Application for Heritage_Lanamar%, Lane or 1. If application for heritage lane or district please attach required petitions (Section 6(a) Ord. No. 66). 1 .,y' C C A HP -11 EXHIBIT "B" REPORT OF FINDINGS 1. The Nardie home reflects special elements of the cultural, social and architectural history of the Saratoga Village. 2. The Nardie home embodies distinctive characteristics of a style (Victorian cottage). A J. Photo (Date Taken: ( I Location Ma j iC 7� 4- (Label',site and surrounding stree roads and prominent landmarks) IV. Significance A. Briefly describe historical and/or architectural importance' L of the resource (include dates, events and persons associated with the site) : " . (Attach sheet if more space required) B. List sources used to determine historical value (i.e. books, documents, surveys, personal interviews and their dates): 0-14 rn & C. Does this site/structure have a county, state or federal historical landmark designation? V. Form submitted by: 1) Name / -I- C'dpr 2) Address 3) Phone Number T(- 7 17 V 0 4) or Saratoc-a Heritage Preservation Commission 3 C A III. Description A. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site (including major vegetation features) or structure and describe any existing major alterations from its original condition: 1) See attached pest control inspection report 2) No Major alterations from original condition (3) No major vegetation features B: Architectural Stvle Victorian C. Year of Cons trnction� 1900 D. Name of Architect or Builder E. Approximate property size in feet (please attach legal description if availablQ) - see attached Title Report 1) Frontage 50' 2 ) Depth 501 3) Approximate Acreage 2500 Sg. Ft. F. Condition of Structure and /or Site (circle one): 1) Excellent 2) Fair 3) Deteriorated G. Is structure altered or unaltered? unaltered H. Secondary structures on site. Describe. -NONE - I. Is this the original site or has the structure been moved? Original VA I Ad C I M P O R T A N T Prior to submitting an application for heritage resource designation or permit application to alter such a resource, the following- should be read carefully. I, the applicant, understand that by applying for a permit to alter such a rest; {. - -,.e t'za} thr, s;. t,e of this reso»rce will be subject to the limitations and provisions of Ordinance No. 66. I also agree that these limitations and provisions will be complied with as well as any conditions upon which the application is granted. In witness whereof, I here unto set my hand this day of 19 /7%1 NSignature Print Name ��7� ' � IL r Address vl'elq )IZL AZ Phone: Residence 3-�f� 3 60. / Business 'FG - 0�p`�_ VI. Recommendation of Commission to (circle one): City Council /Planning Commission /Community Development Department_ A. The Heritage Preservation. Commission is for /against the proposed designation. /permit application. B. Comments: This Victorian cottage is one of the few .remaining in the Saratoga Village district representa- tive of this early period of architecture With its _ _detailing and style it is a significant contribitor to the _charming historic Village character. Thoigh it will _ take an effort on the part of the owner to restore it they have expressed a willingness to cooperate fully with this Commission to ensure its architectural inte- grity is maintained. We are pleased with this effort to rescue part of Saratoga's heritage intact' 4 C C. Findings: 1. The Nardie home reflects special elements of the cultural, soecial and architectural history of the Saratoga Village. � 2. The Nardie home embodies-distinctive charactPristirs of a style (Victorian cottage). C 0 Signed Chairman. of Heritage Preservation Commission i , r C C. Findings: 1. The Nardie home reflects special elements of the cultural, soecial and architectural history of the Saratoga Village. � 2. The Nardie home embodies-distinctive charactPristirs of a style (Victorian cottage). C 0 Signed Chairman. of Heritage Preservation Commission i C ATTACHMENT TO HISTORICAL DESIGNATION /PERMIT APPLICATION FORM We want to.convert the current use from a residential rental unit to a small office building. We plan no structural modifications other than those required to restore the building to its original condition. Specifically, we will build a foundation under the house, repair the roof, rebuild the front porch, rebuild the bathroom, redo the electrical system, and landscape the property. To do this we will need a zoning variance to permit less than the total required number of on site parking spaces. The lot is 501x50' and there is not enough room for 4 parking spaces. C C CITY OF SARATOGA CHERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, November 6, 1985 PLACE: Saratoga Community Library TYPE: Regular Meeting ------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- ROUTINE ORGANIZATION ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cameron, Herd, Voester, Koepernik, Bielinski, Chairperson Landsness Absent: Commissioner Kvamme MINUTES The minutes for September 26, 1985 were approved with the following correction: the boundaries of Ciii'e proposed historic district should not read Oak Place are but Park Place area. The minutes for October 16, were approved unanomously. CI. OLD BUSINESS Commissioner Heid suggested we communicate to the city council the urgent need for staff help to maintain basic heritage commission needs. Commissioner Cameron will draft a memo to the city manager, with a copy to the mayor. A. Preparation of bronze plaques - Report Commissioner Koepernik reported Un the progress of design of the plaques, stating that a mock -up should be here soon. B. Warner Hutton House - Report Commissioner Voester reported on activities in San Diego's Heritage Park. Chairperson Landsness suggested talking to the County Historical Heritage Commission regarding their experience in relocating historic structures. The Commission discussed the upcoming discussion of acquisition of the Warner Hutton house, scheduled for.the next city council meeting. Commissioner Landsness presented a letter sent to Cal Trans requested agreement with the city's desire to designate the house a landmark. 1 I1 C C Other Pending Designations - Comm. Voester Report Mr. Zambetti was unsure as to if he would resubmit his designation. Commissioner Voester is working on the designation of the Fireman's Bell. The next priority will be to work with Madronia Cemetary. D. Home Tour Commissioner Kvamme has spoken to Fox and Carskaden and obtained a X1000 contribution toward the printing costs of the Home Tour brochure. n E. Village Beautification The Commission reviewed the report dated September 27, 1985 of the Saratoga Village Task Force. Commissioner Landsness reported on the input she provided regarding the need for a historic overlay zone, or design criteria similar to that developed by Pacific Grove. II. NEW BUSINESS A. MAULDON /NARDIE DESIGNATION Commissioner Landsness presented the application from Mr. Nardie to have the victorian on 6th and Big Basin designated. Commissioner Heid emphasized that the Commission should in no way get involved with the parking issue, only the working with the owners on designat`i'on,, use of historical building code, etc.etc. B. Commissioner Voester suggested a`neVs story be done on the extent of various designations; Commissioner Bielinski offered to write a release and get it to the papers. C. GYPSY HILL FARM - Commissioner Koepernik visited the site and presented photos. The Commission agreed that there appeared no historical significance to the site or architectural structures; only the age of the house and its rustic charm were of interest. III. ADJOURNMENT The Meeting was adjourned at 5:30 pm. Respectfully Submitted W, c .�<<: `� r GG Seonaid Bielinski, Commissioner C C. I1 C C Other Pending Designations - Comm. Voester Report Mr. Zambetti was unsure as to if he would resubmit his designation. Commissioner Voester is working on the designation of the Fireman's Bell. The next priority will be to work with Madronia Cemetary. D. Home Tour Commissioner Kvamme has spoken to Fox and Carskaden and obtained a X1000 contribution toward the printing costs of the Home Tour brochure. n E. Village Beautification The Commission reviewed the report dated September 27, 1985 of the Saratoga Village Task Force. Commissioner Landsness reported on the input she provided regarding the need for a historic overlay zone, or design criteria similar to that developed by Pacific Grove. II. NEW BUSINESS A. MAULDON /NARDIE DESIGNATION Commissioner Landsness presented the application from Mr. Nardie to have the victorian on 6th and Big Basin designated. Commissioner Heid emphasized that the Commission should in no way get involved with the parking issue, only the working with the owners on designat`i'on,, use of historical building code, etc.etc. B. Commissioner Voester suggested a`neVs story be done on the extent of various designations; Commissioner Bielinski offered to write a release and get it to the papers. C. GYPSY HILL FARM - Commissioner Koepernik visited the site and presented photos. The Commission agreed that there appeared no historical significance to the site or architectural structures; only the age of the house and its rustic charm were of interest. III. ADJOURNMENT The Meeting was adjourned at 5:30 pm. Respectfully Submitted W, c .�<<: `� r GG Seonaid Bielinski, Commissioner q1, j& d- YXtAA-e� 4 14- FIvAKEc E & ART cotAE� the Redwood Room PALO ALTO HYATT (formerly the Cabana hotel) MARCH 28 5:30 pm to 8:OOpm RETIRING City will begin ivin out parking tickets The Saratoga City Council officers to enforce parking laws the handicapped and parking in don't know why we didn't think suggests the city keep the last week unanimously ap- now enforced by the Santa Clara a fire lane are among the of it before," said Council- property and offer a land lease. proved introduction of an or- County Sheriff's Department. violations the CSOs will be able woman Joyce Hlavn . dinance that would extend the Blocking a driveway, to cite motorists for. Currently CSOs enforce authority of community service parking in a space reserved for "I think this is a great idea, I parking laws covered by local ordinance while other parking ' ,..ti. 1111W _ ..,.. laws are covered by state The Nardie home, a Victorian -style cottage at 14650 Sixth St., was recently designated a heritage resource. statute. City staff estimates indicate it will cost. $2,760 a year to ex- pand the CSOs authority in enforcing the parking laws but that the city could expect in- creased revenue of more than $2,000 annually from its share of the bail for the citations issued. The city would also save money because sheriff's deputies won't spend as much time writing tickets. Since the city has a contract with the sheriff's .department for law enforcement . services, some savings will result from ex- panding CSO duties. Under new business, the council decided to hold an in- formational meeting soon with residents living near the Cox - Saratoga Sunnyvale Road property owned by the city to discuss what to do with the parcel. The council reviewed a report from the Finance Ad- visory Committee that evaluated five proposals for the property that could generate income for the city. Four of the options require that the city sell the 2.75 -acre site, while the fifth proposal Mayor Martha Clevenger asked for a staff report listing the options available and their ramifications prior to the in- formational meeting with nearby residents, who will receive notice of the meeting. Currently the land is zoned for commercial purposes. Councilwoman Virginia Laden Fanelli said she would like to see a report that ad- dresses traffic flow projection for developing the land since "those are things that would excite the neighbors." In other business, the council voted 3 -2, with Hlava and Fanelli dissenting, to designate the Nardie home at 14650 Sixth St. as a Heritage Resource. At a previous council meeting,. Fanelli expressed her concern that the Heritage Preservation Commission made its recommendation directly to the council, instead of to the Saratoga Planning Commission. In other action, the council unanimously approved a recommendation from the Saratoga Parks and Recreation Commission to establish a nature camp program at Wildwood Park during the summer. The program would serve children ages three and a half to 10. - arriott. HOTELSoRESORTS , C� G.�n ✓.my^kc. tow" 0 P410 444 14Vw"�h„ Fo�eservations all toll free 800-J28-91Z 2 z IA 1 A. _ STATE OF CALIFORNIA —STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN. Governor DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES State Historical Building Code Board 1500 5th Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 RECEIVED December 2, 1986 . DEC 4 198F COP4MM11TY PF` I I "'Ar -_yT David G. Smith 873 Ferngrove Drive Re: Private Office for Mauldin,-.14650 Sixth Street, =-- _. - -, - -- — - - aratoga, CA (The Nardie Home) Dear Mr. Smith: _..._ I have reviewed your application for waiving certain city, State, or other requirements. The building concerned is a local historical building qualified, to use the State Historical Building Code (SHBC). In fact, it is mandated by the Legislature that the SHBC be used. I should also point out that it is a misdemeanor for any local official not to use the SHBC for a qualified historical building. Under the SHBC, historical buildings are exempt from access requirements and energy requirements per se and alternatives shall be used. Alternatives, for reason, could include doing nothing. We also note that in this building, from a preservation standpoint there is minimal, if any, compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines and the building is losing many of its historical features. For those aspects the Code cannot apply. We wonder about new glass):; the insulation approach, removal of siding, the unnecessary raising up of' the building, lack of use of alternatives for parking, change 'in original structural, roofing type change, chimney removal, replacement of plumbing and electrical, changes in historic railing, flooring, stripping of paint, and particularly the unnecessary_ rearrangement of the bathroom, which presently seems to meet minimal access requirements under the SHBC without destroying historical fabric. The use of a handicapped access lift is also covered by the SHBC which.among other things allows relocation from the primary point of entry. Such a lift should not effect historic fabric if installed next to the parking to come up through the front of the porch. It would not detract in any way. That is if the highly detrimental parking is actually provided under the building. If parking is not provided and other historic features are preserved,_then the lift requirements could -6e exempted if it has a detrimental effect on the historic We are obviously not privy to all of the information, plans, and background on the project and because of our concerns expressed above', we will be unable to comply with your requests unless it is submitted to staff or the Board by the City in behalf of the owners and /or their architects or engineer. In order to have a viable submittal, some attempt should be made to take care of our concerns noted above. David G. Smith -2- December 2, 1986 An appeal to the Board for staff review or advice requires a $200.00 down payment which would only pay for the first 3 -1/3 hours of staff time. An appeal to the Board of a local requirement(s) requires the same $200.00 down payment to which would be added staff time at $60.00 per hour and the Board letter for an additional $200.00. We will retain the information you already sent to us for our files. If you have any additional questions, please call me at (916) 445 -7627. Sincerely, C. Cull imore, AIA Executive Director cc: R. Girvigian Saratoga Building Department Executive Committee Board `�;�5��...^�r°,�,! ,`._;' .kl .•.:•2? ���; � _ �..^; `Jed }';.' 0.♦ ly, r,.�ti:'yf,.'y�ti�. t�'x- TR•'T� "•�,y �t ^y'•'�.= c�.'-.'' +F, Y. l >3i ✓ }y��qt t !u n y (tie i 41 im NN ' � r ✓ n k • c t' r`r fit. a s VT ! r _ CITY Gt SKRATOGA PLANNING DEPARTMENT IDENTIFICATION CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY INVENTORY # PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN (date) Street Address (P V­ APN Historic Name Present Owner kt G (1"uQk V' Address I T '54s P_ ! m ,2 Roar . Present Use 64L U-11 Original Use Other Past Uses hA, A lat DESCRIPTION Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site or structure and describe any major alterations from its original condition: Approximate property size: Lot size (in feet) Frontage Depth or approximate acreage Condition (check one): Excellent ( ) Good ( ) Fair ( ) Deteriorated ( ) No longer in existence ( ) Is the feature: Altered? ( ) Unaltered? ( ) Location sketch map (draw and label site and surrounding streets, roads, and pro- minent landmarks) Threats to site: None known ( ) Private Development ( ) Zoning ('-) Public Works Project ( ) Vandalism ( ) Other ( ) Primary exterior building material: Stone ( ) Brick ( ) Stucco ( ) Adobe ( ) Wood ( ) Other ( ) Is the structure: On its original site? ( ) Moved? ( ) Unknown ( ) Year of initial construction This date is: Factual ( ) Estimated ( ) Architect (if known) Builder ( if, known) f Related features: Barn ( ) Carriage House ( ) Outhouse ( ) Shed(s) ( ) Formal garden(s) ( ) Windmill ( ) Watertower /Tankhouse ( ) Other ( ) None ( ) SIGNIFICANCE Briefly state historical and /or architectural importance (include dates, events, and persons associated with the site when known): :r- Source (books, documents, surveys, personal interviews, and their dates): Form prepared by: Date: 47 ♦ �,�o �� `� �- � �` � °��-� ;� �� ,��d EIA -4 Saratoga DECLARATION THAT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NOT REQUIRED (Negative Declaration) Environmental Quality Act of 1970 File.No:UP -598, V -717 The undersigned, Director of Planning and Environmental Control of the CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal Corporation, after study and evaluation has determined, and°does hereby determine, pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Sections 15063 through 15065 and Section 15070 of the California Administrative Code, and Resolu- tion 653- of the City of Saratoga, that the following described project will have no significant effect (no substantial adverse impact) on the environment within the terms and meaning of said Act. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposal is to change the use of the structure at 14650 Sixth Street, Saratoga, CA. from single family residential to a professional office use. To provide parking,the house is to be raised by two feet and a garage is to be constructed underneath. The lot is substandard in size so that setback and landscaping requirements are not being met. Additionally, the height of the home presently exceeds the maximum 20 ft. limit. NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT Carol Mauldin 15345 Bohlman Road Saratoga, CA. 95070 REASON FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION The project was found not to have a significant effect on the environment as the proposal may be mitigated by the recommendations of the City Geologist, Heritage Preservation Commission, City Horticulturist and the conditions place( on the approval of the project through the use permit and variance processes. Executed at Saratoga, California this 14th day of February , 1986 YITC'HUEK HSIA PLANNING DIRECTOR AND _ ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DIRECTOR'S AUTHORIZED STAFF MEMBER J DATE: 3 -6 -86 COMMISSION MEETING: 3 -12 -86 APN: 517 -08 -04 APPLICANT: Carol Mauldin APPLICATION NO. & LOCATION: UP -598: V -717, 14650 6th Street ACTION REQUESTED: Use Permit Approval to allow an office use; and to Permit an undero.round parking addition to an existing single family structure which will increase the heio.ht of the buildino, to 27.5 ft. (maximum heio.ht permitted 20 ft.>, to maintain existing setbacks of 8 in. in the front, 2 ft. on the right side,, and 6 in. in the rear where 15 ft.. 16.8 ft and 36.7 ft.., respectively.; are required, and Variance Approval to allow minimal landscaping where a landscaped area not less than 10 ft. in depth is required along a Property line that abuts a street. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: Building:, grading and encroachment permits and Business License are required. Application has been made for the historical designation of the structure. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Negative Declaration completed 2/13/86. ZONING: C -V GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Retail Commercial EXISTING LAND USE: Sinole Familv Residential SURROUNDING LAND USES: Motel in the northerly direction;. office use in the westerly direction, residential uses in the easterly and southerly_ directions. PARCEL SIZE: 2500 so. ft. Report to the Planninc. Commission 3/6/86 UP -598, V -717, Carol Mauldin: 6th St. Pape 2 NATURAL FEATURES & VEGETATION: Lot is level and presently developed with a single family residence. There is a large oaf; behind the subject parcel that could be impacted by the project. AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: Level SLOPE AT BUILDING SI'Z'E: Level GRADING REQUIRED: Cut: 1 2S Cu. Yds. Cut Death: 3 Ft. PROPOSED SETBACKS: Front: 8 in. Rear: 6 in. Left Side: 23 ft. Right Side: 2 ft. HEIGHT: 27.5 ft. per staff's measurement. Overall height will increase by 2 ft. IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: 46.7% SIZE OF STRUCTURE: First Floor (existing) 903 sq. ft. (Proposed Garage): 712 so. ft. ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE: The project does not meet all requirements and standards of the zoning ordinance in that the height of the structure exceeds the 20 ft. limit ., the existing setbacks of 2 ft, on the right and 8 in. and 6 in. setbacks in the front and rear do not meet the required setbacks of 16.8 ft, 15 ft. and 36.7 ft., respectively. Additionally, the CV district reouires a minimum landscape strip of 10 ft. in the front which has not been included in the applicant's.proposal. One handicap park.ino. space (14' wide) required by State regulations is not being provided. MATERIALS & COLORS: Wood siding with asphalt shingled roof. PROJECT HISTORY: The applicant.previously applied for a variance to allow two substandard width parkina spaces where four spaces were required in order to convert the use from residential to an office use. At this time_ office uses were permitted in the CV zoning district. The Plannino. Commission reviewed the ' pro * posal at the Committee -of -the -Whole on January 28:. 1986. and the appliant was informed that there was concern over the lack of park.ing. To answer this concern_ the applicant presented an alternative proposal to lift the home up by two feet.. and provide the parking spaces underneath. The Commission stated that adequate parking should be provided and the applicant was directed to submit revised plans for the next available agenda. The applicant has also requested that the structure be desionated as a historic resource. The City Council is presently considering this item. At their meetino, on February 19, 1986, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to not consider the possible historical desionation as part of the variance application for parking or any other application n Report to the Planning. Commission UP -598, V -717, Mauldin, 6th St. related to this structure. 3/6/86 Pace 3 Staff has included the previous Staff Report on the Variance reouest V- 717. This earlier variance addressed the proposal for two substandard parking. spaces where four spaces were required; and no provision for landscaPino of the parkina lot where a minimum 5 ft. landscape strip is required. This item was scheduled for the January 22; 1986, and February 12, 1986 agenda but was continued each time at the applicants request. After reviewing the applicants latest proposal: the Commission still may wish to approve the Variance for the two substandard.parkina spaces and landscape stria. This will be presented as a possible alternative later in the text of this report. Alternatively; it may be the Commssion's decision to deny this Variance request. UP -598 The Use Permit application involves three issues: The chanae to an office use., the increased height of the structure and the existing nonconforming setbacks. A Use Permit is required for the change in use because offices are now conditional uses in the CV zoning district. This is a recent chano.e in the ordinance that went into effect on February G. 1986. Additionally., a use permit can be utilized to vary height and setback requirements. To consider the chano.e from a residence to an office use, the existing . uses must be examined. Presently, a professional office is located to the left of the sub.i.ect parcel. However this office; which is also a former sinole family residence., fronts on Bia Basin Way and is more a oart of the established commercial district. Behind the parcel is another commercial structure., a motel. This building also fronts on Bin Basin Way. Across the street and to the left of the applicant's pro'perty. there are residential uses. Protection of these residential uses is obviously a concern. The Use Permit procedure itself is a means to control adverse impacts that may result from a project or future use of the site. The Commission maintains discretionary power to revoke any use permit if a use is later found to be too impactive. Therefore, if the Commission later finds that an office use in this location is not a'p'propriate, there is a means to eliminate the use. The permit for an office use will run with the land. It should be noted that with the existing zoning of the site_ retail is a Permitted..use. If this is a concern of the Commission and it is determined that an office use is not appropriate,, there should be some consideration oiven to changing the zoning of the site. To vary the height of the structure is also an issue of the use permit. With the underoround parkina, Staff's method of measuring heicht results in a proposed height of 27.5 ft. However, the building will only be raised 2 ft. overall from its existing height above the ground. There are two story structures of comparable height across the street and behind the subject Parcel. While there are lower single story structures Report -to the Planning. Commission 3/6/86 UP -598, V -717, Mauldin Paoe 4 on either side of the applicant's building: the overall increase of two feet in heiaht probably would not be very noticeable on the project's completion. Staff does have concern about.the need to remove the limbs of the nearby oak which extend out over the existing roofline. The Citv_ Horticulturist should review and comment on the proposal. Staff foresees no real 'problem in maintaining the existing setbacks. The structure could be relocated more towards the middle of the lot_ but this would eliminate the possibility for an adequate back -up area for the oaraoe. Since the area below the e;istino structure will have to be oraded for the oaraoe, Staff has a concern about the protection of the off -site oak which could be adversely effected by the grading. The City Horticulturist should review the project to minimize impacts to the oak. It does appear that the applicant is making an effort to address the possible impact on the oak. Turf block is being provided for the backup area of the Qaraoe and the maximum cut depth proposed is 3 ft. Staff should also note that there has been problems in the Village Area with the high water table and storm runoff. Staff would recommend that the City Geologist review the Project prior to issuance of any Building Permits. A later plan submitted by the applicant indicates that a refuse area will be provided in the oaraoe area. The lighting proposed will be limited to the front porch area, on the covered garage ceiling_ and the back porch area. The a pplicant's architect has indicated that the lighting will be historically aooropriate. No signage is being, 'proposed by the applicant. The Heritage Preservation has reviewed the plans for the remodeling of the structure at their, meeting. on March 5: 1986. The Commission agreed that the exterior changes proposed would not detract from the historical character of the structure but they would like to review any future modifications. Four parking spaces;, three standard and one compact; are being 'provided as required. What is not beina orovi.ded is a handicap parking space (minimum 14 ft. width) required by State regulations. Existing buildings may be exemoted from this regulation where due to physical constraints of the site, the project would not allow compliance with this regulation or equivalent facilitation without creating an unreasonable hardship. Due to the substandard size of the lot, the exemption from this requirement may be warranted. Lastly,. the requirement for street improvements will be included as a condition of approval. These improvements include pavement widening_ and /or overlay, sidewalk, and curb and outters. Reoort to the Plannino Commission UP -598, V -717.. Mauldin; 6th St. OPTIONS 3/6/86 Paae 5 1. The Commission may aprove the application as proposed and allow the Office use with underground ;parking and deny the previous variance request for two substandard parking spaces with no landscaping,of the .parking lot. 2. The Commission may approve the previous variance request to allow two substandard parking spaces. This would be in lieu of the parking garage. A use permit would still be reouired to allow the office use. Requiring parking fees or purchasing other *oarkino in the Village may be used in conjunction with the approval of this variance. 3. All applications ma.y be denied and the existing residential use may continue. 4. The Commission may deny the application and change the zoning and general plan designation of the .property from commercial to residential. This would eliminate the possiblity of future requests for office or retail uses on this site. A retail use., although not beino requested by the applicant, is a permitted use in the CV Zoning. District. Any future change to retail use would probably be limited by the Parking. required. 5. The Commission may wish to obtain the recommendations of the City_ Geologist and City Horticulturist prior to the approval of the project. The items may be continued for this purpose. 6. The use ,oermit may be aranted for a limited time so that impacts may be assessed after a specified period. FINDINGS: 1. The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the zoning ordinance in that an office use is a conditional use in the zonino district and adequate oarkino is beino provided. 2. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health;, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that the required oarking is beino provided. the existing setbacks,. althouoh nonconforming; are being, maintained and the two foot overall height increase will not be a significant change from the existing height. The use does not appear to be impactive but the Planning Commission has the right to revoke the use permit if circumstances change. 3. The proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance in that the Use Permit may be used to vary height and setback requirements as aporopriate. Also, an office use may be permitted on approval of a conditional use permit. Report to the Planning Commission 3 /6/86 UP -598., V -717, Mauldin, 6th St., Page 6 RECOMMENDATIONS: If the Commission determines that an unreasonable hardship would result from requiring compliance with State Handicap requirements, staff recommends approval per the Staff Report dated 3 /6/86 and Exhibits "B-tand GI' with the following conditions: 1. The liohtino plans shall be reviewed and approved by Planning_ Staff. No off -site light or glare shall be permitted. 2. City Geologist shall review and approve the plans for the project prior to issuance of Grading_ or Building_ Permits and all recommended conditions shall be met. 3. The City Horticulturist shall review and approve the project prior to issuance of building or grading permits and all recommended conditions shall be met. 4. Any proposed sip page shall meet the requirements of the sign ordinance. 5. Once use of the property has chanoed to commercial the additional use of the site as residential is not approved until additional parking is provided or a variance for parking is obtained. 6. If pavino. for the parking area exceeds 1000 sq, ft., Building_ Site Approval shall be required. 7. Heritao,e Preservation Commission shall review and approve any exterior chances to the structure. 8. Refuse container shall be screened. 9. Landscaping adjacent to the driveway shall not exceed 3 ft. in height for sio.ht distance purposes. Landscaoino shall'be provided along the northwesterly prooerty line to screen the underground parking area. Landscape plans shall be reviewed and approved by Planning Staff prior to issuance of building .Permits. 10 Pavement widening and /or overlay. and gutters shall be provided Engineering Division. V -717 with 6 ft. wide sidewalk., and curb as reviewed and approved by the Another issue has been added under the previous variance application, V- 717. Since the structure is being modified to place the oaraoe underneath, all requirements of the CV Zonino District have to be met. One issue. which could not be legalized through the use permit provess, is the required 10 ft. landscape strip alono. the front property .line. Due to the location of the home, 8 in. away from the front property line, a landscape strip would be impossible to provide without relocating the structure. There is a 8 ft. wide area between the buildina and the road pavement. However, this is within the City rioht- of -wav and the aoolicant will be required to orovide improvements in this area. Any landscaoino proposal Report to the Planning. Commission UP -598. V -717, Mauldin, 6th St. 3/6/86 Page 7 within the ria.ht -of -wav should be reviewed by the Public Works Division. Accordina to the Ordinance, the purpose of the landscape strip is to ensure privacy:: screen unsightliness and insulate adjacent properties against noise. Since the structure is existing, privacv concerns and noise levels will not significantly increase with the change in use. Some landscaping may be provided in the right-of-way area to help screen the structure _ turf block:. rather than pavina beino used for the o.araae back up area. FINDINGS: 1. Practical Difficulty or Unnecessary Physical Hardship The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified reo.ulation would result in a practical difficulty because the structure would have to be moved or reduced in size to meet the requirement for a 10 ft. wide landscape strip. 2. Exceptional or Extraordinary "Circumstances There are exceptional circumstances involved with the project as the lot is substandard in size and the existing home is located within 8 in. of the front property line. Little area is left to provide landscaping. 3. Common Privileae Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the 10 ft. landscape strip would deprive the applicant of further improvements to the property for the office use. 4. Special Privilege Because exceptional circumstances exist, o.rantino the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege. 5. Public Health_ Safetv or Welfare Grantino the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variance request for the 10 ft landscape stria per Staff Report dated 3/6/86 and exhibits "Band Gt' with the following conditions: 1. Any landscaping proposed within the right-of-way area shall be reviewed and approved by Staff. 2. Landscape plans shall be submitted to Staff prior to issuance of Building Permits. Reaort to the Planning. Commission UP -598, V -717, Mauldin, 6th St. 3/6/86 Page 8 3. Any imarovements in the right-of-way shall be reviewed and aaaroved by the Public Works Division and anv required encroachment.oermit shall be obtained. APPROVED .C/ Diana Lewis Planner DL /b is P.C. Aoenda 3/12/86 EIA -4 File No. V -717 Saratoga The undersigned, OF SARATOGA, a determined, an provisions of th 15065 and Sect Resolution 653 - project will hav the environment DECLARATION THAT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NOT -REQUIRED ( Negative Declaration) Environmental Quality Act of 1970 Director of Planning and Environmental Control of the CITY Municipal Corporation, after study and evaluation has does hereby determine, pursuant to the applicable Environmental 'Quality Act of 1970, Section 1506:3 through on 15070 of the California Administrative Code, and of the City of Saratoga, that., the following described no significant effect (no substantial adverse impact) on ithin the terms and mean.inQ of said Act. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project involves converting an existing professional office use at 14650 6th Street, lot is commercially zoned and the proposed parking cannot be provided due to the size required to allow two, substandard width par are required. single family residence to a Saratoga, CA. AlthouQh the use is permitted, adequate of the lot. A variance is ,ing spaces where four spaces NAME_ AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT Carol Mauldin 15345 Bohlman Road Sarat.oQa, CA. 95070 REASON FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION This project was found not to have a significant effect on the environment in that potential impacts resulting from the.project may be mitigated t.hrOUgh conditions placed on the project during the variance process. Specifically, the City Horticulturist will review impacts of impervious coverage on the off -site oak., drainage from the lot will be directed towards the street, and, where possible, landscaping for screening will be provided. Executed at Saratoga., California this 25th day of November_, 1986, ROBERT S. SHOOK DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DIRECTOR'S AUTHORIZED STAFF MEMBER REVISED: 3/05/86 DATE: 1/23/86 COMMISSION MEETING: 3 /12/86 APN: 517 -08 -04 APPLICANT: Carol Mauldin OWNER: Mrs. Nardie APPLICATION NO. & LOCATION: V -717 14650 6th Street ACTION REQUESTED: Variance Approval to allow two parkins spaces which are substandard in width (9 Ft. where 9.5 Ft. is required) where 4 parking spaces are required and to allow no landscape strip for the parking lot where a minimum 5 ft. wide strip is required, for the proposed office conversion of an existing single family residence. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: Business License and Building Permits to remodel are required. Applicant has made an application for the historical designation of the building. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Negative Declaration prepared 11/25/85 ZONING: C -V GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Retail Commercial EXISTING LAND USE: Single Family Residence SURROUNDING LAND USES: Motel in the northerly direction; office use in the westerly direction; residential uses in the easterly and southerly directions. PARCEL SIZE: 2500 sq. ft. NATURAL FEATURES & VEGETATION: Lot is level and presently developed with a single family residence. There is a large oak behind the subject parcel which could be impacted by additional paving. AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: Level SLOPE AT BUILDING SITE:; Level GRADING REQUIRED: None proposed Report to Planning Commission V -717, Mauldin, 6th Street 3/05/86 Page 2 EXISTING SETBACKS: Front: 8 Inches Rear: 6 Inches Left Side: 23 Feet Right Side: 2 Feet EXISTING HEIGHT: 24 Ft. SIZE OF STRUCTURE: First Floor: 888 Sq. Ft. ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE: The project does not meet all the requirements and standards of the Zoning Ordinance in that four 9.5' x 18' parking spaces would be required for a professional office use. The applicant is providing two 9' x 20' spaces. Additionally, State requirements for handicap parking are not met. And a S ft. landscape strip is not being provided in front of the parking area. The existing structure does not meet required setbacks or height limit and the minimal landscaping for the CV district is not being provided. However, since no change to the structure is involved other than required repairs, and the structure is legally non - conforming, no variance is required. ANALYSIS: The applicant has recently acquired this turn -of -the century Victorian cottage with the intent to convert the single family residence into an office building. The zoning for the lot is commercial, and a professional office is a conditional use. A variance is required in that a minimum of four (4) parking spaces are necessary for a professional office building of this size. Additionally, the standard parking space width is 9.5 ft. and the applicant has proposed two, 9 ft. wide spaces. Lastly, a minimum 5 ft. wide landscaping strip is required to screen the parking lot from residential properties across the street. The applicant's parking layout does not provide for this requirement. By State regulations, at least one handicap parking space (14 ft. wide) would be required for this project. To meet this width requirement, only one parking space would be possible on this site. For an existing building, an exception to this requirement may be granted by the Planning _ Commission if it can be determined that due to legal or physical constraints, compliance with these regulations or equivalent facilitation would create an unreasonable hardship. The issue in this application is whether the applicant may intensify the use of this site without, because of the size of the lot, being able to provide the required parking. One contention for converting the home to an office use is so that this historic building may be saved. Staff feels that although the applicant is willing to provide the needed repairs to maintain the building, reasonable use of the site would not be denied the applicant if it were to continue as a residential use. Report to Planning Commission 3/ 05/86 V -717, Mauldin, 6th St. Page 3 An option available to the applicant is to investigate creating a joint parking area with the existing office in the northerly direction. There appears to be a moderate size yard between the two buildings, and the Commission, in the past, has allowed higher parking ratio standards for parking districts elsewhere in the Village. Another suggestion has been made to create another parking district on Big Basin Way near 6th Street. The Commission could also require in -lieu parking fees. Staff feels that other approaches to solve the parking problem should be investigated and eliminated first before approving a variance. This parking variance request is particularly significant in that the Commission has recently been asked to grant a variance request for inadequate parking in another location in the Village. Consistency and a clear statement on parking from the Commission appears to be warranted. Staff should note that although the applicant's use of the building does not appear to be too impactive, the location of the property adjacent to residential uses would seem to warrant additional concern. Also of concern is an ordinance -size oak located just off -site to the rear of the property. Because the Saratoga Motel is located on one side of the oak, the additional impervious coverage from the parking lot may cause damage to the tree. If the Commission is willing to grant the variance, Staff recommends that the City Horticulturist review the project so that any means to save the tree may be incorporated into the project as a condition of approval. It also should be noted that adjacent to the street another tree, which may be less than ordinance size, would have to be removed to allow access to the parking area. Another consideration of the variance application is the substandard width of the parking spaces proposed. The applicant is providing a 9 ft, width where a minimum 9.5 ft. width is required by Ordinance. The applicant has only 23 ft. from the building line to the left property line. Although the situation would be tight, Staff feels that the additional one (1) foot needed to meet the standard parking space width is possible. No landscaping is required along the right property line as the adjoining parcel in this direction is zoned commercial. The wider space also allows better maneuverability in and out of the spaces. This issue will be moot, however, if the variance for permitting two spaces on site is not approved. The proposed parking layout requires that automobiles back out onto the street when exiting. This would create an unsafe situation, particularly with two cars exiting at the same time. Lastly, Article 11 of the Ordinance requires a minimum landscape strip of a 5 ft. depth along the front when a parking area for a commercially zoned property is located across from a residential district. The parking layout proposed by the applicant is such that this landscape strip is not being provided. Staff feels that there is the option to have a singular, central access to the parking 1•ot which would allow a small amount of landscaping on either side of the access. This approach would seem to reduce the Report to Planning Commission V -717, Mauldin, 6th St. 3/05/86 Page 4 possibility for tandem parking on site which would be less aesthetically pleasing. The Commission may also wish to consider if the zoning for this parcel is proper. If the concensus is to maintain the residential use of the property, rezoning and amending the General Plan may be the best approach. FINDINGS 1. Practical Difficulty or Unnecessary Physical Hardship Due to the size of the lot, it would be difficult to provide the four parking spaces required for a professional office use. But the applicant would not be denied reasonable use of the property by continuing the present residential use. Also, if two spaces are allowed, the lot's width is adequate to accomodate two 9.5 ft. wide spaces. Lastly, by using- a common entrance to the parking lot, landscaping could be provided on either side of the access. Z. Exceptional or Extraordinary Circumstances This substandard lot is extremely limited in size. The existing structure does not meet setback requirements and adequate parking is not presently provided. However, this finding cannot be made for the substandard spaces where two, 9.5 ft, wide spaces may be provided, or for the landscape strip where providing a common entrance with landscaping on either side may be possible. 3. Common Privilege Although the property is zoned Commercial, being able to intensify the use of the property without providing adequate parking is not a common privilege. Additionally, since site conditions do not eliminate the Possibility of providing standard width spaces or landscaping on either side of a common entrance to the parking lot, the applicant would not be denied a common privilege. 4. Special Privilege Because it is not a common privilege to intensify the use of the site without providing adequate parking, and there is sufficient width on site to accomodate two 9.5 ft. wide spaces, and landscaping would be Possible on either side of a common access to the parking lot, granting the variance would constitute a grant of special privilege. S. Public Health. Safety and Welfare Granting the variances will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Report to Planning Commission V -717, Mauldin, 6th St. 6. Future Traffic Volumes 3/05/86 Page 5 It would not appear that future traffic volumes generated by the use of the site would significantly increase so as to require strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation. 7. Parking or Loading of Vehicles Granting the variance would result in the parking or loading of vehicles on public streets. However, there is, at present, room in the right -of -way area adjacent to the site for on- street parking. For aesthetic and practical reasons, sufficient off - street parking should be provided but it does not appear that granting the variance would interfere with the free flow of traffic.. 8. Safety Hazard The parking layout proposed would result in cars backing out of the lot on to the street when exiting. This could create a safety hazard. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the variance for -the number of spaces provided having been unable to make Findings #1, 3, 4 and 8 and denial of the variance for substandard width parking spaces and not providing a landscape strip having been unable to make Findings 41, 2, 3 and 4, per the Staff Report dated 3/05/86 and Exhibit "B ". If the Commission can make these findings and determines that an unreasonable hardship would result from requiring compliance with State regulations for handicap parking, Staff has included some recommended conditions: 1. The parking area shall be served by a common driveway access centered between the parking spaces with a minimum 5 ft. deep landscape strip on either side of the access. The access to the parking area is to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2. Revised site plan and landscape plan for Condition #1 shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Staff. Height of landscaping along this strip shall be limited to 3 ft, to avoid sight distance problems on exiting the lot. 3. City Horticulturist to review the project's impacts on the oak tree behind the subject parcel, and all mitigation measures to preserve the oak shall be met. 4. The additional plans and City Horticulturist review are required prior to issuance of any building permits necessary for the structure's remodeling. 5. Once use of the property has changed to commercial, the additional use of the site as residential is not approved until additional parking is provided or another variance for parking is approved. Report to Planning Commission 3 /05/86 V -717, Mauldin, 6th St. Page 6 6. If paving for the parking area exceeds 1,000 sq. ft. in area, Building Site Approval would be required. 7. All signage shall conform to the Sign Ordinance. S. Removal of any ordinance -size tree shall require a Tree Removal Permit. 9. Drainage for the lot shall be directed towards the street. 10. Parking layout shall be revised to show 9.5 ft. wide spaces-with double striping, to be reviewed and approved by Staff prior to issuance of Building Permits for any remodeling. 11. A use permit is required prior to establishment of any office use. 17 APPROVED: - DL /dsc P.C. Aqenda: 3/12/86 Diana Lewis Planner i� 4TOC --b-)iL. "71 1 aa- 5�S'� f �'►'► �5 • Na o, ' e Al RECEIVED CW? OCT 24 1985 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ; T Dates � __. eived 10-24-85 Designation No-HP-11 Meeting Date Fee (No _fee for designation only) CITY OF SARATOGA HERITAGE RESOURCE DESIGNATION /PERMIT APPLICATION FORM I. Identification of Heritage Resource A. Name 1) Common Name 2) Historic Name -NONE - B. Location /Address 14650 6th Street, SARATOGA C. Assessor's Parcel-Number 517 -8 -4 D. Use of Site Rental Residence 1) Original Residence E. Present Owner Elizabeth Nardie i (.Please a ttach. documentation of ownership) wvvi 1) Address fz.- 2) Phone Number' _ 0' 3) Public or Private Ownership "� 04,U, 4) Has Owner been Notifies: of Application? =z 9' 0 I. Purpose of Application A. Application for Designation or Permit? Designation 1. If applica .�on for pe,:mit '-5i` f_,y des. -rs.be proposal and * ,} alteration,; required. -see attachment- B. Application for Heritage_Landma:.,-, Lane or 1. If application for heritage lane or district please attach required petitions (Section 6(a) Ord. No. 66). 1 i III. Description A. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site (including major vegetation features) or structure and describe any existing major alterations fro,—q=5its original condition: (1) See attached pest control inspection report (2) No Major alterations from original condition (3) No mayor vegetation features B. Architectural Style Victorian C. Year of Constrnctionf %171900 / D. Dame of.Architect or Builder E. Approximate property size in feet (please attach legal description if available) - see attached Title Report 1) Frontage 50' 2 ) Depth 50, 3) Approximate Acreage 250CSg. Ft. F. Condition of Structure and /or Site (circle one): 1) Excellent 2) Fair 0 Deteriorated G. Is structure altered or unaltered? unaltered H. Secondary structures on site. Describe. -NONE- I. Is this the original site or has the structure been moved? Original 2 e J. Photo (Date Taken: ( Location Map r iN (Label"'�ibte and surrounding street roads and prominent landmarks) IV. Significance A. Briefly describe historical and /or architectural importance of the resource (include dates, events and persons associated with the site) : (Attach sheet if more space required) B. List sources used to determine historical value (i.e. books, documents, surveys, personal interviews and their dates): C. Does this site /structure have a county, state or federal historical landmark designation? V. Form submitted by: 1) Name AL. e t C or Rd 2) Address / j ?3 !Z Jr 3) Phone Number TC 7— 17 y 6 4) or Saratoc -a Heritage Preservation Commission 3 sa; I M P O R T A N T Prior to submitting an application for heritage resour6"�= sdesignation or permit application to alter such a resource, the following should be read carefully. I, the applicant, understand that by applying for a permit to alter such a resc�. f,'. F t'�.at -the si. t�� of this Yesohrre �aS.11. be subject to the limitations and provisions of Ordinance lvo. 66. I also agree that these limitations and provisions will be complied with as well as any conditions upon which the application is granted. In witness whereof, I here unto set my hand this day of 19 1jc 'jSignature Print Name C-777t /U Aic_� 1 F Address �E-5; GCjg IA ���f��•�ve- Phone: Residence 360 Business�C�7G`7 VI. Recommendation of Commission to (circle on--): City Council /Planning Commission /Community Development Department A. The Heritage Preservation. Commission is for /against the proposed designation. /permit application. B. Comrr,ents: This.Victorian co.ttage.is one of the few remaining in the Saratoga Village district representa- tive of this early period of architecture With its detailing and style it is a significant contributor to the charming historic Village character. Though it will _take an effort on the part of the owner to restore it they have expressed a willingness to cooperate fully with this Commission to ensure its architectural inte- grity is maintained. We are pleased with this effort to rescue part of Saratoga's heritage intact' E C. Findings: 1. The Nardie home.'reflects special elements of the cultural, soecial and architectural history of the Saratoga Village. 2 The Nardie home embodies distinctive chara ristirs of a style (Victorian cottage). Signed Chairman of Heritage Preservation Commission 5 i C. Findings: 1. The Nardie home.'reflects special elements of the cultural, soecial and architectural history of the Saratoga Village. 2 The Nardie home embodies distinctive chara ristirs of a style (Victorian cottage). Signed Chairman of Heritage Preservation Commission 5 ATTACHMENT TO HISTORICAL DESIGNATION /PERMIT APPLICATION FORM Lam' :f'=s We want to.convert the current use from a residential rental unit to a small office building. We plan no structural modifications other than those required to restore the building to its original condition. Specifically, we will build a foundation under the house, repair the roof, rebuild the front porch, rebuild the bathroom, redo the electrical system, and landscape the property. To do this we will need a zoning variance to permit less than the total required number of on site parking spaces. The lot is 50'x50' and there is not enough room for 4 parking spaces. •Y'J�n ORDINANCE NO. HP -11 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE NARDIE HOME (APN 517 -8 -4) AS A HERITAGE RESOURCE =fit s THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: After careful review and consideration of the report of the Heritage Preservation Commission, the application and supporting materials, the City Council has determined that the findings per Exhibit "B" can be made and hereby designates the property known as the Nardie Home. SECTION 2: This designation shall become operative and take effect thirty (30) days from its date of passage. This ordinance was regularly introduced and after the waiting time required by law was thereafter passed and adopted this day of , 1985, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST; CITY CLERK MAYOR U=91 EXHIBIT "B" n7- REPORT OF FINDINGS_5 1. The Nardie home reflects special elements of the cultural, social and architectural history of the Saratoga Village. 2. The Nardie home embodies distinctive characteristics of a style (Victorian cottage). I \ i, Ni LL I`• � I C l I H� !" 51x714 SiRr T LXISTIN4 MOTEL 4 Solo a2- ",. ' �1STING P CS ICLJGL 1, i CIO� �0 Z W� u V C -z is p r J r Y �. Z arpv w a Q I �T M CITY ',lFA" 't r Ll N Ll t I SvTL < pA a�Pj � Sal• _ r T c •r� Q U LCCAM ON PLAN 1 =GALE I Ma.[• _i{•(oS0 - SIXTFt •3T SARATOC.A CA o5 11.1 Q A•P N 51-7 - e) _ U F.JRTION OF L?( Q LLOC7'` 11 L CITY OF -- �°.RA705A SANTA C. -AMA. COUNT`( /1 .K ,NhP moo?, 'AID P46C .43 l.J �J1 Z Ill a r� NOTI=S :Z- ID e.NGG WILL- REMAIN IN SILL, VOW MG Z N EXTGILIOZ FIN154 AND OLTAIL AS I- MrSCNTL`( M j'T1!AT GO >:XG EPT FOR Gi+ANAeS 'ro T1iG N_ ZXISTIN�% CECKS TD pCC:OMOOS-i'G AOCITfONAL STEFS RGQ[J12tO DU6 TO RAISING -f$3E EXISTING X �UIlC1N� FLOOR L.GV SL- T\VO F: _ , Z ;1 u.! O � Z � J W C ly U C- -RAGE e- 51 i E PI AN w �q 1� .4 � CALL Y4� ll'ou r GtRADC5 Ate SGT U61t•IA EXISTINy Hou 15M FLOOtC LaV EL AS Q ! Q -i• HOU•DG rLOOR Lc\/1<.L `HILL P F- 1 ~ �,A15LO TO T _ �OO CE.NOTES FIN15ft 4A[X9 f n h fdol Ex DG NOT G'S E.Y.1�T1N4 GrLIaG' S ax O N FLOOR PLAN OF EXIS i ING F`-:—�IDE NCL 4CALS YL 11 . I L pa 55/- -71ON' A — A sc1,L-- ,4" . IL,` io N Z �v a� rJti LLl <i= 0 mV M N Q J F- v _ riCVI U Z 3XISTIN6�; -- I w v� ill V. Z aF Re-Incew -M i-'-' N A / \ e � � ^ , 1'i ,n `� W G Z 4 W r n Q � N wN NG \V CLOOA LNLL 14.0 4 m O m L � Ql��c iU16+ COUtT L�VIEL � � SUMr Lxvei 55/- -71ON' A — A sc1,L-- ,4" . IL,` io N Z �v a� rJti LLl <i= 0 mV M N Q J F- v U Z I w v� ill �a as F,c !IOCta LVL. Z aF Re-Incew -M i-'-' N L ^ , 1'i `� W G Z 4 W Q � N wN 4 m O m I \ NOF,7H ION ... Is- i ',:'l II n il ih fftf I N Ji AI F171 11 1`41EW FL oCM LF-VrL- FLeom LEVEL 15,TIKEC T ELEVAMON EAST E LEE\/A7 k:2 t-4. gi ja- LLI 4 O C4 1p ui Z Ld Z %A O V-717 :3 v��g .4 A fz Nardie building designated as resource Mauldins made changes but kept flavor By Nicole D'Amore Carol and Michael Maul- din proved that you can make practical use of a building while still maintaining its historical character. The result is Saratoga's first commercially used structure to receive recognition as an heritage resource — the Nardie building. Their efforts were re- cognized last week when they were presented with a bronze plaque from the Heritage Preservation Commission. The building received des- ignation because it "em- bodies distinctive char- acteristics of the Victorian cottage style of arhitecture and reflects special elements of the cultural, social and ar- chitectural history of the Saratoga Village." When the Mauldins bought the Nardie house at 14650 Sixth St. for their computer company, ALC Network Sys- tems, it was a dilapidated rental unit owned by Eliza- beth Nardie. The house was built about 1895, but little else is known about its history. "We wanted an office building and thought We could renovate it," Michael Maul- din said. "But there were a lot of problems," he added. One of the problems they encountered was the city or- dinance requiring businesses to have a certain number of parking spaces. "It was zoned a commer- cial property," Mauldin said. 'But to make it an office building we had to put in a The Nardie house before renovation. certain amount of parking spaces and the lot was too small. We raised the building two feet and put parking underneath to neet the park- ing ordinance." `Was a disaster' "This building was a disaster," Carol Mauldin said. "It was mustard yellow and overgrown with weeds, the floors were uneven and the stairs were just boards so- meone had nailed up. But I saw that it could be brought back to its potential." Working with architects. David Smith - and Richard Haro and builder Jess Haro of Kasa Kraft Construction of San Jose, they finished the renovation in about five months. "We brought it back to the original condition," Carol said. "Ninety -nine per- cent of the boards on the out- side are original and we saved the stained glass window." The bathroom was reno- vated with new tile and fix- tures but maintains the orie- inal style. "We left the orig- inal tub," Carol said.' The windows are the same and they even found an old fuse box and mounted it on the side of the house. The porch and stairs were rebuilt, the lot was landscaped and the house was painted. "We tried to save as much The Nardie house after it was renovated by Carol and Michael Mauldin and raised to provide side - parking underneath. of the original woodwork as we could, but some places it was rotted away," Michael said, adding they replaced wood where necessary with the same type as the original. Only the plaster was replaced throughout the house and that was because it was damaged when the house was raised for parking, Carol said. In additon to city require- ments, the fire department also had requirements they had to meet. The wiring was old and had to be replaced, she said. Recommends it to others Despite the problems, Carol said she would recom- mend renovation to others. "I might be a glutton for punish- ment, but I want to do it again and again," she said. "There were other people who had looked at this house and now wish they had bought it," she added. "I have been in Sara- toga 20 years and wanted to invest in the town." Heritage Preservation Commissioner Sharon Lands - ness said she hopes more peo- ple follow the Mauldins' ex- ample. "If people would use some imagination it's so much better to do something with some character to it." she said. 'California Awful' seems to be the style of new development here. Saratoga is in the Dark Ages as far as preservation is concerned. Now we have an example we can point to."