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."