09a Staff Report - 54 Chester St.DATE:
·TO:
.FROM:.
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
March 27,2006
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
:.••t ".'a -',,:,,~i~~~
DEBRA J.FIGONE,TOWN MANAGER
-,\.
.MEETING DATE:4/03/06
ITEM NO.
SUBJECT:CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF A PLA.NNING COMMISSION DECISION
DENYING DEMOLITION OF A PRE-I 941 RESIDENCE,CONSTRUCTION
OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE WITH REDUCED SETBACKS AND REQUEST FOR AN
INTERPRETATION OF THE CELLAR POLICY ON PROPERTY ZONED R-
ID.APN:529-08:-008 ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATION
8·05-031 PROPERTY LOCATION:.54 CHESTER ST.
OWNERIAPPLICANT/APPELLANT:ANNA HUYNH AND KEVIN CRANE
RECOMMENDATION:.
1.Open and hold the public h'earing and receive public testimony.
2.Close the public hearing.
3.Uphold the Planning Commission's decision and deny Architecture and Site Application
S-05-16{requires motion).,
.4..Refer to the Town Attorney forthe preparation of the appropriate resolution.
If the Town·Council determines that the appeal should be granted and that the Planning
Cominission',s decision should be reversed or modified:
1.'F.ile Council needs to find one or more of the following:
(1)
(2)
PREPARED BY:
Where there was error-or abuse of discretion on the part of the,Planning
Commission;or
The new information that was submitted to the Council during the appeal
process that was not readily and reasonably available 'for submission to the
Commission;or .
~~~~.BUDN;LOR,Z,...
DIRECtOR F COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Reviewed by:'[V.Assistant Town M'anager -'-'<b'tIfh'-.Attorney __Clerk Finance
.-"¥-_Community Development Revised:3/27/06 2:18 pm
Reformatt.ed:.5130/02
Page 2
MAYORAND TOWN COUNCIL
RE:APPEAL OF 54 CHESTER STREEt
March 30,2006
(3)An issue or policy over which the Commission did not have discretion to
modify or address,but which is vested in the Council for modification or
.decision.'
2.If the predominant reason for modifying or reversing the decision of the Planning
Commission is new information as defmed in subsection (2)above,it is the Town's policy
that the application be returned to the Commission for review in light ofthe new information
unless the new information has a minimal effect on the application.
3.Ifthe appeal is approved,(A)make the required findings and considerations (Attachment 1)
and (B)approve the application subject to the recommended conditions of approval
(Attachment 2).
4.Refer to the Town Attorney for preparation of the appropriate resolution.
PROJECT SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting approval to demolish a pre-1941 residence,construct a new single family
residence and accessory structure and is requesting an interpretation of the Town's Cellar Policy.The
applicant's letter ofjustification (Exhibit C ofAttachment 6)and development plans (Attachment 8)
are attached.The existing one story,1,310 square foot residence is located at 54 Chester St.on a
5,500 square foot lot.The proposed two story Craftsman style home is 1,903 square feet witq a 252
square foot detached garage and a 1,726 square foot cellar.
DISCUSSION
The main issues for the Council's consideration and discussion are as follows:
'0
Design and Neighborhood Compatibility
Chester Street is comprised of one and two story homes with a variety of architectural styles.The
proposed Craftsman style home is compatible with the other styles in the neighporhood.A two-~tory
home is compatible with the neighborhood as there are seven other two-story homes in the
neighborhood as listed in Table 1.The proposed house size (1,903 s.f.)and floor area ratio (FAR,
.35)~e compatible with the neighborhood.·The average home size in the neighborhood is 1,731
square"feet.There are five other homes that are larger than the proposed home and two homes that
have a larger FAR..
The Town's consulting architect reviewed the project and concluded that the design is good and
provided two suggestions (Exhibit D ofAttachment 6).The first is to consider wood caps and bases
at the front porch columns,which the applicant incorporated in the design.The second suggestion
is to add divided lights to the double hung windows,which the applicant declined.The Town's
consulting architect noted that the two suggestions would enhance the design,but were not absolutely
essential to a good design.
Page 3
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
RE:APPEAL OF 54 CHESTER STREET
March 30,2006
Staff carefully evaluated the architecture and compatibility as discussed in Section 2 of the Planning
Commission report (A~tachment 6)and concluded that the home is well designed,the architecture is
well executed ana.the mass, scale and compatibility of the home satisfies the Residential
Development Standards .
.Table 1 shows the house size,FAR and lot size of the neighboring properties.
Table 1
I,"".
.'House Size Comparison for 54 Chester Street.....'..
APN Address House Size .Lot Size FAR
529-08-004 46 Chester St.1,039 5,500 .19
529-08-005 48 Chester St.936 5,500 .17
529-08-006 50 Chester St.1,397 5,500 .25
529-08-007 52 Chester St.1,753 5,500 .32
529-08-009 56 Chester St.1,882 5,500 .34
529-08-010 58 Chester St.1,925 5,500 .35
529-08-011 62 Chester St.1,921 5,500 .35
529-08-012 64 Chester St.1,966 5,500 .36
529-06-059 41 Chester St.1,768 4,514 .39
529-06-058 46 Chester St.1,319 6,000 .22
529-06-057 47 Chester St.1,991 5,800 .34
529-06-056 49 Chester St.1,280 5,600 .23
529-06-044 497 Bird Ave.3,238 10,890 .30
529-06-043 59 Chester St.1,7.39 5,940 .29
529-06-019 499 Wright St.1,816 7,040 .26
AveraJ!:e ..•........••..>........•'.1,731 .,.29
529-08-008
(proposed proi ect)54 Chester St.*1,903 sq.ft.5,500 .35
*Squarefootage ofpropose home ifthe project is approved with entire cellar
not counted in the square footage ofhouse.
,Cellar Policy Interpretation
Staffforwarded this application to the Planning Commission because the cellar extends beyond what
has traditionally been considered the building footprint.The total square footage ofthe cellar is 1,726
square feet.1,411 square feet of the cellar is beneath the footprint of the home and 315 square feet
of the cellar is beneath the attached deck located at the rear of the home.
Applicant's Request.The applicant requested that the Planning Commission make an interpretation
that the attached deck is part of the building footprint.The applicant points out that the Town's
Cellar Policy allows a cellar to be located underneath the building footprint which includes the
Page 4
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
RE:APPEAL OF 54 CHESTER STREET
March 30,2006
garage.The applicant believes that an attached deck should be considered part of the building
footprint like an attached garage because the attached deck has the same impact as an attached garage.
Further,the applicant states that t.he proposed cellar will not be visible to the neighbors and does not
change the look of the house.
Staff's Interpretation.The Town's Cellar Policy states that cellars and basements (except light and
exit wells)shall not extend beyond the building footprint (Exhibit G and H of Attachment 6).
Historically,staff has not considered unenclosed decks to be part of the building footprint.The
proposed home is 1,903 square·feet,which is also the maximum allowed.square footage for the site.
PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission considered this project on February 8,2006 and denied the project.The
verbatim meeting minutes (Attachment 5)and staffreport (Attachment 6)are attached.The Planning
Commission heard public testimony and discussed the cellarpolicy interpretation,mass and scale of
the house and neighborhood compatibility.Originally,the Commission continued the item and
directed the applicant to redesign the home,but the applicant requested a denial.
Public Testimony
Brian Cullman,497 Bird Ave.Mr.Cullman supports the proposed project and states that the project
is a nice addition to the neighborhood and also supports the basement underneath the deck.
Planning Commission Discussion
Interpretation ofPolicy.The Planning Commission supports the existing interpretation ofthe cellar
policy.The Commission stated that cellars underneath the deck should count as part ofthe floor area.
Ifthe applicant proceeds with the current plan,the cellar underneath the deck will cause the proposaL
to exceed the allowed floor area by 315 square feet.The Planning Commission indicated that it is
not inclined to support a home that is over the allowed floor area due to several issues that will be
discussed in the following sections.
General Plan Policy Regarding Cellars.The Commission discussed General Plan policy L.P.2.3
which states,'"Encourage basements and cellars to provide "hidden"square feet in-lieu of visible
mass;"The Commission concluded that the proposal does not meet the intent of this General Plan
policy.
Mass and Sccde.The Commission is concerned with the mass and scale,visibility,intensity,shadow
impacts,setbacks and neighborhood compatibility.The Commission stated that the proposed home
is too intense for the site and not compatible with the neighborhood.They directed the applicant to
reduce the square footage on the second story,reduce the bulk ofthe house and increase the setbacks
so that the house would be more compatible with the other homes in the area.The Commission
acknowledged that the design of the house is acceptable.
Page 5
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
RE:APPEAL OF 54 CHESTER STREET
March 30,2006
APPEAL
The applicant appealed the Planning Commission's decision on February 17,2006 (Attachment 3).
The applicant asserts that the Planning Commission erred because they did not fully understand how
the mass,scale and compatibility of the plan fits into the neighborhood (Attachment 4).
NEIGHBOR CONCERN
On March 29,2006,staff received a letter from Elizabeth Ansnes,the property owner of 56 Chester
St.and neighbor directly west ofthe site (Attachment 7).Ms.Ansnes is concerned with the location
ofthe proposed home to hers and the shadows cast on her home that will limit her access to morning
sun.In addition,the proposed side dormer presents a privacy issue for Ms.Ansnes,
The applicant states that he discussed the project with Ms.Ansnes approximately two years ago,in
the initial stages of design.According to the applicant,Ms.Ansnes did not have an issue with the
proposed home.Ms.Ansnes'concerns were brought to staffs attention after the Planning
Commission hearing.
Discussion
The proposed location ofthe house meets all required setbacks.The adjacent homes on,the north side
ofthe street have their driveways located towards the west and home towards the east.The proposed
home has a detached garage that is located in the rear of the site with the driveway on the east.
Although the driveway location and detached garage is unique compared with the adjacent homes,
staff determined that a detached garage helps to minimize the mass and scale ofthe proposed home.
The shadows cast by the proposed home will primarily impact the neighbor to the west during the
winter months and has less impact through the remainder of the year.
STORY POLES
On March 30,2006,the applicant advised staffthat the story poles are approximately 1.5 feet closer
to the west property line than they should be.The proposed home is 6.5 feet setback from the
property line and the story poles are located approximately 5 feet from the property line.The required
setback per the Town Code is 5'.
CONCLUSION:
The Planning Commission denied the application due to the mass and scale,neighborhood'
compatibility issues and overall intensity of the proposed home on the project site.The Council
should evaluate and determine ifthe proposed cellar may extend under the deck.The Council should
also consider the mass and scale of the proposed home and determine if the proposed home is
appropriate for the site and compatible with the neighborhood.
Page 6
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
RE:APPEAL OF 54 CHESTER STREET
March 30,2006
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The proj ect is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303 ofthe State Environmental Guidelines
as adopted by the Town.
FISCAL IMPACT:None
Attachments:
1.Required Findings and Considerations (four pages)
2.Recommended Conditions of Approval (five pages)
3.Notice of Appeal (two pages)received on February 17,2006
4.Letter from applicant dated March 22,2006 (four pages)
5.Verbatim Meeting Minutes from Planning Commission meeting for February 8,2006 (10 pages)
6.Report to the Planning Commis_sion dated February 2,2006 (rriinus Exhibits A,B and I)
7.Letter from Elizabeth Ansnes dated March 27,2006 (two pages)
8.Development Plans (11 pages),received on December 1,2005
.Distribution:
Kevin Crane and Anna Huynh,54 Chester Street,LosGatos,CA 95032
BNL:JSG:mdc
N:\DEV\CNCLRPTS\2006\54 Chester Street.wpd
REQUIRED FINDINGS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR
54 Chester Street
Architecture and Site Application S-05-031
Requesting approval to demolish a pre-1941 residence,construct a new single family residence
and accessory structure with reduced setbacks and request for and interpretation of the cellar
policy on property zoned R-1D.APN:529-08-008
PROPERTY OWNER:Anna Huynh and Kevin Crane
FINDINGS
•The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303 of the State
Environmental Guidelines as adopted by the Town.
CONSIDERATIONS
•As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for Architecture and Site
applications:
The deciding body shall consider all relevant matter including,but not limited to,the
following:
(1)Considerations relating to traffic safety and traffic congestion.The effect ofthe site
development plan on traffic conditions on abutting streets;the layout ofthe site with
respect to locations and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian entrances,exits,
drives,and walkways;the adequacy of off-street parking facilities to prevent traffic
congestion;the location,arrangement,and dimension oftruck loading and unloading
facilities;the circulation pattern within the boundaries of the development,and the
surfacing,lighting and handicapped accessibility of off-street parking facilities.
A.Any project or development that will add traffic to roadways and critical
intersections shall be analyzed,and a determination made on the following
matters:
1.The ability of critical roadways and major intersections to
accommodate existing traffic;
2.Increased traffic estimated for approved developments not yet
occupied;and
3.Regional traffic growth and traffic anticipated for the proposed
project one (1)year after occupancy.
Attachment 1
B.The deciding body shall
roadway/intersection capacity
determinations:
review the application for traffic
and make one (1)of the following
1.The proj ect will not impact any roadways and/or inter.sections causing
the roadways and/or intersections to exceed their available capacities.
2.The project will impact a roadway(s)and/or intersection(s)causing
the roadway(s)and/or intersection(s)to exceed their available
capacities.
Any project receiving Town determination subsection (l)b.1.may
proceed.Any project receiving Town determination subsection
(l)b.2.must be modified or denied if the deciding body detemlines
that the impact is unacceptable.In determining the acceptability of a
traffic impact,the deciding body shall consider if the project's
benefits to the community override the traffic impacts as determined
by specific sections from the general plan and any applicable specific
plan.
(2)Considerations relating to outdoor advertising.The number,location,color,size,
height,lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs and structures in
relation to the creation of traffic hazards and the appearance and harmony with
adjacent development.Specialized lighting and sign systems may be used to
distinguish special areas or neighborhoods such as the downtown area and Los Gatos
Boulevard.
(3)Considerations relating to landscaping.The location,height,and materials ofwalls,
fences,hedges and screen plantings to insure harmony with adj acent developmentor
to conceal storage areas,utility installations,parking lots or unsightly development;
the planting of ground cover or other surfacing to prevent dust and erosion;and the
unnecessary destruction ofexisting healthy trees.Emphasize the use ofplanter boxes
with seasonal flowers to add color and atmosphere to the central business district.
Trees and plants shall be approved by the Director of Parks,Forestry and
Maintenance Services for the purpose of meeting special criteria,including climatic
conditions,maintenance,year-round versus seasonal color change (blossom,summer
foliage,autumn color),special branching effects and other considerations.
(4)Considerations relating to site layout.The orientation and location of buildings and
open spaces in relation to the physical characteristics of the site and the character of
the neighborhood;and the appearance and harmony of the buildings with adj acent
development.
Buildings should strengthen the form and Image of the neighborhood (e.g.
downtown,Los Gp.tos Boulevard,etc.).Buildings should maximize preservation of
solar access.In the downtown,mid-block pedestrian arcades linking Santa Cruz
Avenue with existing and new parking facilities shall be encouraged,and shall
in.clude such crime prevention elements as good sight lines and lighting systems.
(5)Considerations relating to drainage.The effect ofthe site development plan on the
adequacy of storm and surface water drainage.
(6)Considerations relating to the exterior architectural design of buildings and
structures.The effect ofthe height,width,shape and exterior construction and design
of buildings and structures as such factors relate to the existing and future character
of the neighborhood
and purposes of the zone in which they are situated,and the purposes of architecture
and site approval.Consistency and compatibility shall be encouraged in scale,
massing,materials,color,texture,reflectivity,openings and other details.
(7)Considerations relating to lighting and street furniture.Streets,walkways,and
building lighting should be designed so as to strengthen and reinforce the image of
the Town.Street furniture and equipment,such as lamp standards,traffic signals,fire
hydrants,street signs,telephones,mail boxes,refuse receptacles,bus shelters,
drinking fountains,planters,kiosks,flag poles and other elements of the street
environment should be designated and selected so as to strengthen and reinforce the
Town image.
(8)Considerations relating to access for physically disabled persons.The adequacy of
the site development plan for providing accessibility and adaptability for physically
disabled persons.Any improvements to a nomesidential building where the total
valuation of alterations,structural repairs or additions exceeds a threshold value
established by resolution of the Town Council,shall require the building to be
modified to meet the accessibility requirements of title 24 of the California
Administrative Code adaptability and accessibility.In addition to retail,personal
services and health care services are not allowable uses on nonaccessible floors in
new nomesidential buildings.Any change of use to retail,health care,or personal
service on a nonaccesslble floor in a nomesidential building shall require that floor
to be accessible to physically disabled persons pursuant to the accessibility
requirements of title 24 of the California Administrative Code and shall not qualify
the building for umeasonable hardship.exemption from meeting any of those
requirements.This provision does not effect lawful uses in existence prior to the
enactment of this chapter.All new residential developments shall comply with the
.Town's adaptability and accessibility requirements for physically disabled persons
established by resolution.
(9)Considerations relating to the location ofa hazardous waste management facility.
A hazardous waste facility shall not be located closer than five hundred (500)feet to
any residentially zoned or used property or any property then being used as a public
or private school primarily educating persons under the age of eighteen (18).An
application for such a facility will require an environmental impact report,which may
b~focused through the initial study process.
•As required by Section 29.10.09030(e)of the Town Code for the demolition ofa single
family residence:
1.The Town's housing stock will be maintained in that the house will be
replaced.
2.The structure has no historic significance.
3.The 'property owner has no desire to maintain the structure.
4.The economic utility of the structure is in fair condition.
N:\DEV\FINDINGS\54 Chester.wpd
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
54 Chester Street
Architecture and Site Application S-05-031
Requesting approval to demolish a pre-1941 residence,construct a new single family residence and
accessory structure with reduced setbacks and request for and interpretation of the cellar policy on
property zoned R-1D.APN:529-08-008
PROPERTY OWNER:Anna Huynh and Kevin Crane
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
(Planning Division)
1.APPROVAL:This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions
of approval listed below and in substantial compliance with the development plans dated
December 1,2005.Any changes or modifications made to the approved plans shall be
approved by the Director of Community Development,Development Review Committee or
the Planning Commission,depending on the scope of the change(s).
2.EXPIRATION:Zoning approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to
Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code,unless the approval has been vested.
3.COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM ..The applicant shall prepare and submit a memorandum
with the building permit,detailing how each of these Conditions of Approval have or will
be addressed.
4.TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained prior to the issuance
of a Building,Grading or Encroachment Permit.
5.NEW TREES.The new trees to be planted shall be double-staked,using rubber tree ties and
shall be planted prior to occupancy.
6.PROTECTIVE FENCING.Prior to any construction or building permits being issued,the
applicant s.hall install the required protective fencing.
7.ARBORIST RECOMMENDATIONS:The Consulting Arborist recommendations dated
November 26,2005 must be strictly adhered to,prior to and throughout construction.
8.SALVAGING OF MATERIALS.At least ten days prior to the date of demolition,the
developer shall provide to the Town a written notice and an advertisement published in a
newspaper of general circulation,regarding the availability of materials for salvage,
including the name and telephone number ofa contact person.No salvaging ofmaterial shall
occur until a demolition permit has been approved by the Community Development
Department..
9.RECYCLING.All wood,metal,glass and aluminum materials generated from the
demolished structure shall be deposited to a company which will recycle the materials.
Receipts from the company(s)accepting these materials,noting type and weight ofmaterial,
shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Town's demolition inspection.
.(Building Section)
10.PERMITS REQUIRED:A building permit shall be required for the addition and remodel of
the existing single family residence.Separate permits are required for site electrical,
mechanical,and plumbing work.
Page 1 of 5
Attachment 2
PAGE 2
Address:54 Chester St
Architecture and Site Application #S-05-031
11.CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:The Conditions of Approval must be blue-lined in full on
the cover she~t of the construction plans.
12.SIZE OF?LANS:Four sets of construction plans,maximum size 24"X 36."
13.SOILS REPORT:A soils report,prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official,
containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations,shall be submitted with
the building perinit application.This report shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer
specializing in soils mechanics.ALTERNATE:Design the foundation for an allowable soils
1,000 psf design pressure.(Uniform Building Code Volume 2 -Section 1805)
14.FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS:A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or
land surveyor may be required to be submitted to the proj ect building inspector at foundation
inspection.This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified
in the soils report;and,the building pad elevation,on-site retaining wall locations and
elevations are prepared according to approved plans.Horizontal and vertical controls shall
be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items:
1.Building pad elevation
2.Finish floor elevation
3.Foundation comer locations
15.TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE:California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF-1R
and MF-1R must be blue-lined on the plans.
16.TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS:New wood burning fireplaces shall be an EPAPhase
II approved appliance as per Town Ordinance 1905.Tree limbs shall be cut within'1O-feet
of chimneys.
17.SPECIAL INSPECTIONS:When a special inspection is required byUBC Section 1701,the
architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted
to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit.The Town
Special Inspection form must be completely filled-out,signed byall requested parties and
be blue-lined on the construction plans.Special Inspection forms are available from the
Building Division Service Counter or online at www.losgatosca.gov.
18.NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION STANDARDS:The Town standard Santa Clara Valley
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program shall be part ofthe plan submittal as the second
page.The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Service Counter for a fee
of $2 or at San Jose Blue Print.
.19.APPROVALS REQUIRED:The project requires the following agencies approval before
issuing a building permit:
1.Community Development:JudieGilli at 399-5702
2.Engineering Department:Fletcher Parsons at 395-3460
3.Parks &Public Works Department:(408)399-5777
4.Santa Clara County Fire Department:(408)378-4010
5.West Valley Sanitation District:(408)378-2407
6.Local School District:(Contact the Town Building Service Counter
for the appropriate school district and to obtain the school form.)
Page 2 of 5
PAGE 3
Address:54 Chester St
Architecture and Site Application #S-05-031
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS:
(Engineering Divisio!1)
20.CARPORT.Engineering shall confirm carport driveability prior to issuance of a building
permit.
21.GENERAL.All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town
Standard Drawings and the Town Standard Specifications.All work shall conform to the
applicable Town ordinances.The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job
related dirt and debris at the end of the day.Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm
drainage facilities.The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will
not be allowed unless a special permit is issued. The developer's representative in charge
shall be at the job site during all working hours.·Failure to maintain the public right-of-way
according to this condition may result iIi.the Town performing the required maintenance at
the developer's expense.
22.ENCROACHMENT.PERMIT.All work in the public right-of-way will require a
Construction Encroachment Permit.All work over $5,000 will require construction security.
23.PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS.The developer or his representative shall notify the
Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24)hours before starting any work pertaining to
on-site drainage facilities,grading or paving,and all work in the Town's right-of-way.
Failure to do so will result in rejection'ofwork that went on without inspection.
24.CONSTRUCTION STREET P ARKlNG.No vehicle having a manufacturer's rated gross
vehicle weight exceeding ten thousand (10,000)pounds shall be allowed to park on the
portion of a street which abuts property in a residential zone without prior approval from the
Town Engineer (§15.40.070).
25.SITE DRAINAGE.Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks.No through curb
drains will be allowed.Any sump outfall shall be directed to a 5'x 5'x5'dry well located a
minimum of 10-feet from property line.
26.NPDES.All pavement outside of the structure footprint shall be pervious.
27.SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RlGHT-OF-WAY.It is the responsibility of contractor and
home owner to make sure that all dirt tracked into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on
a daily basis.Mud,silt,concrete and other construction debris SHALL NOT be washed into
the Town's storm drains.
28.UTILITIES.The developer shall install all utility services,including telephone,electric
power and all other communications lines underground,as required by Town Code
§27.50.015(b).All new utility services shall be placed underground.Underground conduit
shall be provided for cable television service.
29 .RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.·The developer shall repair or replace all
existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of
developer's operations.Improvements such as,but not limited to:curbs,gutters,sidewalks,
driveways,signs,pavements,raised pavement markers,thermoplastic pavement markings,
etc.shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original
condition.Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the
Engineering Construction Inspector,and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access
Page 3 of 5
PAGE 4
Address:54 Chester St
Architecture and Site Application #S-05-031
provisions.Developer shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction
Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions.
30.SIDEWALK REPAIR.The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards
any sidewalk damaged now or during construction of this project.Sidewalk repair shall
match existing color,texture and design,and shall be constructed per Town Standard Details.
The limits of sidewalk repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector
during the construction pha?e of the project.
31.CURB AND GUTTER.The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards
any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction ofthis proj ect.New curb and gutter
shall be constructed per Town Standard Details.The limits of curb and gutter repair will be
determined by the Engirieering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the
project.
32.DRIVEWAY APPROACH.The developer shall install one (1)Town standard residential
approach.The new driveway approach shall be constructed per Town Standard Details.
33.AS-BUILT PLANS.After completion of the construction of all work,the original plans
shall have all changes (change orders and field changes)clearly marked.The "as-built"plans
.shall again be signed and "wet-stamped"by the civil engineer who prepared the plans,
attesting to the changes.The original "as-built"plans shall be review and approved the
Engineering Inspector.A Mylar and AutoCAD disk of the approved "as-built"plans shall
be provided to the Town before the Faithful Performance Security or Occupancy Permit is
released.The AutoCAD file shall include only the following information and shall conform
to the layer naming convention:a)Building Outline,Layer:BLDG-OUTLINE;b)Driveway,
Layer:DRIVEWAY;c)Retaining Wall,Layer:RETAINING WALL;d)Swimming Pool,
Layer:SWIMMING-POOL;e)Tennis Court,Layer:TENNIS-COURT;f)Property Line,
Layer:PROPERTY-LINE;g)Contours,Layer:NEWCONTOUR.All as-built digital files
must be on the same coordinate basis as the Town's survey control network and shall be
submitted in AutoCAD version 2000 or higher.
34.SANITARY SEWER LATERAL.Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by West Valley
Sanitation District and approved by the Town of Los Gatos before they are used or reused.
Install a sanitary sewer lateral clean-out at the property line.
35.SANITARY SEWER BACKWATER VALVE.Drainage piping serving fixtures which have
flood level rims less than twelve (12)inches (304.8 mm)above the elevation of the next
upstream manhole and/or flushing inlet cover at the public or private sewer system serving
such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved
type backwater valve.Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge through the
backwater valve,unless first approved by the Administrative (Sec.6.50.025).The Town shall
not incur any liability or responsibility for damage resulting from a sewer overflow where
the property owner or other person has failed to install a backwater valve,as defined section
103(e)of the Uniform Plumbing Code adopted by section 6.50.010 of the Town Code and
maintain such device in a functional operating condition.Evidence ofWest Valley Sanitation
District's decision on whether a backwater device is needed shall be provided prior to
issuance of a building permit.
36.CONSTRUCTION NOISE.Between the hours of8:00 a.m.to 8:00p.m.,weekdays and 9:00
Page 4 of 5
PAGE 5
Address:54 Chester St
Architecture and Site Application #S-05-031
a.m.to 7:00 p.m.weekends and holidays,construction,alteration or repair activities shall be
allowed.No individual piece ofequipment shall produce a noise level exceeding eighty-five
(85)dBAattwenty-five (25)feet.Ifthe device is located within a structure on the property,
the measurement shall be made at distances as close to twenty-five (25)feet from the device
as possible.The noise level at any point outside of the property plane shall not exceed
eighty-five (85)dBA.
37.HAULING OF SOIL.Hauling of soil on or off-site shall not occur during the morning or
evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m.and 9:00 a.m.and between 4:00 p.m.and 6:00
p.m.).Prior to the issuance of a building permit,the developer shall work with the Town
Building and Engineering Department Engineering Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan
to ensure safe and efficient,traffic flow under period$when soil is hauled on or ffthe project
site.This may include,but is not limited to provisions for the developer/owner to place
construction notification signs noting the dates and time of construction and hauling
activities,or providing additional traffic control.Cover all trucks hauling soil,sand,and
other loose debris or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
N:\DEV\CONDITNS\2006\54 Chester.wpd
Page 5 of 5
FlLlt~G FEES
$272.00 Residential
$1089.00 per Commercial,Multi-
family or Tentative Map Appeal
Pursuant to the Town Code,the Town Council may only grant an appeal of a Planning Commission decision in most matters if the
Council Ends that one of three (3)reasons exist for granting the appeal by a :vote of at least tbree.(3).Councilmembers.Therefore,
please specify how one o\those reasons exist in the appeal:
1.The Planning ColIllllission erred or abused its discretion because 5 Eli"II T1 ."'e-it-~P
____________________________.,........,-_.;OR
2..There is new information that was not reasonably available at .the time of the Planning Commission decision,which is
_________-------'-----........,.---~-(please attach the new information ifpossible):OR
3.The Planning ColIllIlission did not have discretion to modify or address the following policy or issue that is vested in the Ta\VD
Council:.~___'__~~
IF MORE SPACE IS NEEDED,PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL SJ:lEETS.
IMPORTANT:
ADDRESS:5"C/1;PsTfR..sT.
l--os CA"rVS i D4
SIGNATURE:L a~of ~"\A\.a.;\Cu'~~,~"-~
.Appellant is responsible for fees for transcription ofminutes.
Appeal must be filed within ten (10)calendar days ofPlaIJDiug Commission Decision accompanied by the required filing fee.
Deadline is 5:00 p.m.on the 10 th day following the decision.lfthe lOtIi day is a Saturday,Sunday,or Town holiday;'then it
may be filed on the workday immediately follov.'.ing the lOth day,usually a Monday.
The Town Clerk will set the hearing withing 56 days of the date of the Planning Commission Decision (TO\VD Ordinance No.
1967)
AJJ.appealregarding a Change ofZone app.lication or a subdivision map only must be filed "vithin the time limit specified in
the Zoning or Subdivision Code,as applicable,which is different from other appeals.
Once filed,the appeal will be heard by the Town Council.
If the reason for granting an appeal is the receipt of new information,the application will usually be retumed to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration.
PRJ}.,1'fN.AME:rbi/I)Cr(/jiVfZ.·-;-flll/,I\i't4 I-fUy;tJ!I
7
DATE:FIi"tJ.i:'1-))..OiJ r;
PHONE:I/O qr-.:1 75--UJ 2 q
5.
6.
3.
4.
1.
2.
***OFFICIAL USE ONLY ***(//
DATE OF PUBLIC HEAP~G:.~!l/31Af §CONFIRMA..TIONLETTER SENT:Date:_
~ending Planning Department Conf"rrmati@
DATE TO SEND P1JBLICATION:._
TO P.PPLICANT &..A.PPELLANT BY:
DATE OF PUBLICATION:
N:\DEV\FOKMSlPlar,ning\?lanlling Commissiorl Appeal.v'Pd -July 1,2005
Attachment 3
54 Chester street
Los Gatos
Project:$-05-031
1.TheE?lanning Corn.rnission erred or abused its discretion because "t.he
Corr~ssion did not fully understand and consider how ~he mass,scale
and compatibility of the plan fits into the neighborhood.The design
plan has met all the town standards,except for the cellar under the
deck portion,according to the town's planning staff,the town's
architect and the town's historical commission.They also agreed that
the plan does fit in the neighborhood.There was no public disagreemen~
from our neighbors about our plan designs.
March 22,2005
Town Council Appeal
54 Chester Street
Los Gatos,CA 95032
Dear Town Council,
We are writing to request for your approval of the house design of our resident on 54
Chester Street.
As an introductory background,the project started out as a remodel.Our resident was
built in 1920's and is,therefore,classified as a historical resident even though there is no
distinguish architectural aspects to it.We have met with the historical committee a few
times to ensure that the new design of the house meets the historical committee's
requirements.When we submitted the drawings to the planning department for review
and approval,they recommended us to submit a demolition application because the house
remodel may go under the 50%savings requirement.We followed the planning
department's recommendation and submitted the demolition application.Per the
planning department's requirement,we also hired a structural engineer,whom found the
structure of the house was too unsound to be saved.In addition,we paid the fees for the
town architect to review the architecture drawing.The town architect had only two minor
comments about window design and adjusting the shapes of the columns.
At this step of the process we thought we can obtain a building permit as a next step,as
we thought we have met all the town's standards and guidelines,but we were notified
that the drawings did not follow the town's planning staffs interpretation of the cellar
policy.We felt that we had spent many months working with the town to arrive with a
workable design of the resident so it was a huge disappointment for us to learn the news.
But we decided to go ahead and request for approval from the planning commission and
now the town council's.
I will now address the Planning Commission concerns.Our house plans were denied due
to the following concerns that will be addressed individually.But first I would like to
address my understanding of the roles and responsibility of the planning conimission.
The town council passed Resolution 2002-25 which governs the design review process
and clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the town's planning commission and
town's architectural consultant.
A.The planning commission must make one ofthe following findings to modify the
consulting architect's recommendation.
•That the recommendations ofthe consulting architect were made based on erroneous
information provided by the applicant.
•That the consulting architect made a mistake offact.
Attachment 4
•That there is compelling evidence,received through public testimony that there is a
privacy or other neighborhood impact to warrant plan modifications.
The planning commission desires to make modifications to our house plans,but
did not find any of the above findings to overrule the architect's opinion that OUf
house.plans are fine.We did not provide erroneous information to the consulting
architect,the consulting architect did not make a mistake of fact,and there is no
compelling evidence of neighborhood impact,but on the contrary of testimony of
neighborhood support.-
C.Rather than focus on the design detail ofproposed projects,the planning commission
should look for trends in the design ofproposed projects that reflect the needfor changes
to the design standards.
Our house plans met the town's design standards for all the following concerns of
the planning commission,except for one item (cellar).If the planning commission
has concerns about the design standards of our plans,they need to change the
standards for all architectural plans submittals not just single out the one plan they
happen to see every now and then.Hundreds of plans are submitted and approved
by the planning staff that meets the town standards without the planning
commission ever seeing them.
Our plans were review by the historical committee,by the town's planning staff,and by
the town's architect.We have addressed all their concerns and have incorporated their
recommendations into our house plans.
To address the concerns of the planning commission:
1.Bulk and Mass -
a.The house plans are for a two story house;the second story is set back
from the first story and has two dormers on the side.The height of the
house from the street is 26 feet,while the standards are set at 30 feet.The
highest point of our house at 26 feet is the same height as our neighbor's
house on 56 chester,but the 26 feet of height is less than other two stories
houses in the neighborhood,such as houses on 58 and 41 Chester Street.
b.The roof line from the street drops down and becomes smaller on the back
half of the house where it is a really a clerestory.It only covers half of the
first floor footage and it is not visible from the front street.
c.We took into consideration to lessen the mass of the house by putting the
garage in the back of the lot instead in front of the lot;thus creating less
mass facing the street.This is compared to the neighbor at 52 Chester who
has a two car garage in front and which takes up 40 feet of the 50 foot lot
width towards the street.Our plans have only 30 feet of mass facing the
street.
d.The aboveground square footage of the house design is 1903 square feet.
This meets the town's standards for FAR for that lot size (5500 sf).
e.There are many houses in the neighborhood,specically on Bird and
Wright Avenue,where the houses at or exceed the current FAR for the lot
size.The development behind Highway 9 on Boyer Lane where the houses
of2600 sq feet were built on lot sizes of 4,000 in 2001.
f.In summary,our house is designed to minimize the bulk and mass at or
beyond the town standards.
2.Shadowing -Based on the above explanation of bulk and mass,our house plans
create less of a shadowing effect than the neighbor's house on us (56 Chester).
The plans also create less shadowing than other two story houses in the
neighborhood.
3.Visibility -The visibility of the house plans were kept to the minimum.This is
explained the bulk and mass section.
4.Setback -The current house plans call out for 7 foot setback on one side with one
exception where a small 3 foot section of the wall is located with 6 foot setback.
The other side ofthe house's setback is 10 feet.The town standards for setbacks
is 5 feet.We have met or exceeded the town's standards.
\
5.Character -The character of the house plans resemble our current house character
(1920 craftsman style).The look of the house does fits into the character of the
neighborhood.The town's architect and the planning staff both have agreed that
the character and look of the house plans are perfect for the neighborhood. There
have been several plans approved in our neighborhood that truly do not fit the
neighborhood character.For example,houses on 493A1B Wright Avenue were
built two or three years ago,both houses look identical and the designs are
inappropriate for the character of the neighborhood.
6.Cellar not conforming -this is the crux of the matter.We have made the decision
to reduce the mass of the house by having the detached garage located in the back
of the house.This also provides the authentically look ofthe 1920 house.The
town's cellar policy allows a cellar under an attached garage.Please note that our
lot naturally slopes from the front to the back;therefore,the house requires to
have a four feet deck above ground attached to the back of house in order to go
from inside the house to the back yard.The deck requires a four foot foundation
support and it would be natural to use the area under the deck.We consider the
deck is an extension of the house and part of the main footprint.The deck is
smaller than a two car garage by 75 square feet.
Because the lot naturally slopes from the front to the back,there is no visibility of
the cellar from the front view of the house ..In addition,the natural slope lot does
not require an additional height for the cellar in the back of the house,including
the deck portion.As a result of the natural slope lot,the mass of the house above
ground is the same with or without the cellar.
In reality,we can not apply the town's cellar policy or the town's height policy to
our house design because of the natural slope of the lot.The town's cellar policy
and height policy can be enforced for houses that are built on flat lot.
7.What we are truly requesting is to allow a cellar under the attached deck in the
similar light as an attached garage,or allow the additional FAR as it does not
create additional visible mass what so ever.
In conclusion,the plalU1ing commission is going against the town's architect,the town's
plalU1ing staff and the town's standards in denying our house plans without a thorough
understanding the design of the house,as well as the natural slope of the lot.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Kevin Crane and A1U1a Huynh
1
2
4
6
Los Gatos Planning
Commissioners:
A P PEA RAN C E S:
Phil Micciche,Chair
John Bourgeois
Michael Kane
Tom O'Donnell
Lee Quintana
Steve Rice
Joanne Talesfore
1
2
3
PRO C E E DIN G S:
4
5 ,COMMISSIONER KANE:I live within 500 feet of the
subject property and must recuse myself.
7
Assistant Director of
Community Development:
Town Attorney:
Randy Tsuda
Orry Korb
7
8
ORRY KORB:For the record,Commissioner Kane,
you're recusing yourself because your hbuse is within 500'.
10
11
Transcribed by:vicki L.Blandin
(510)526-6049
CHAIR MICCICHE:Okay,next item,54 Chester
10 'Avenue,Architecture and Site Application S-05-031.Is the
11 IApplicant here?Have you submitted a card with your name on
12 lit?Thank you.Mr.Kevin Crane.
~rt
I
V1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
1
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KEVIN CRANE:My name is Kevin Crane and I and Ann
are the owners of the residence on 54 Chestnut Street.We've
been actually working on this project since early 2003,and
the reason why it's taken so long is we spent a lot of time
designing the house to make sure it meets the Town's
requirements and also meets our needs.So we've been working
with the Town quite a number of hours.I'd like to make this
brief.I just want to go over the main point of,the Town's
Staff Report.
We do not have an attached garage,as you can see
from the plans,but a detached garage,which minimizes the
mass of the house and enhances,the look of the house at the
same time.So the detached garage is in the back.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
2
1 I As mentioned before,the windows along the deck
2 Iwill provide the house with the authentic look of a 1920
we in~stigated the option of having the garage
attached to the house,which would have made this meeting
not necessary,but that option is not feasible because it
would change the design of the house and probably make it
less compatible to the neighborhood.
We would like the Commission to view the a,ttached
4
5
6
house with a basement.We currently have a partial basement.
To sum it up,overall the cellar does not minimize
the mass of the house as opposed to an attached garage if we
went that route.I believe that's all I have to say.
boxed trees.Have you guys thought through the landscaping
yet?
Applicant at this point?Commissioner B9urgeois.
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:Your tree mitigation,it
says you're taking out five and that you're required to
replace it with three 36"boxed trees.On the plans I didn't
see any landscaping plans.I look at the yard and I'm having
trouble figuring out where you could actually put three 36"
7
10
n
12
13
14
deck in the same light as the attached garage.The underdeck
portion of the cellar is about 315'square feet.It's
smaller than a cellar that is permitted on a typical
attached two-car garage,which is about 444'square feet.
We also are taking advantage of the slope and
topography of the house.The lot naturally slopes down,so'
the cellar is only a foot about the ground,which also
minimizes the house,and it slopes to 4'in the back,so
it's not even a 4'cellar all the way through the house.So
7
10
n
12
13
14
CHAIR MICCICHE:Do we have any questions of the
15 the deck is 4'or 5'above the ground.The cellar under the
15 KEVIN CRANE;In the plans,if you look there I
17
16 deck would give the house a more architectural look than one
without one.Currently we have a deck and the size of it,
18 lone side of it is concrete blocks as opposed with cellar be
16
17
18
guess in the back they'll probably reside in the left-hand
corner of the lot.
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:Behind the sunken
19 Ihaving windows.19 'I courtyard?
20
21
22
23
24
25
We have spoken to our neighbors and they have no
concern about the cellar under the deck.There is no
visibility of the cellar and the deck to the side,and back
and front neighbors.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
3
20 KEVIN CRANE:Correct,by the sunken court and to
21 the left of it.
22 COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS;Away from the garage?
23 KEVIN CRANE;Away from the garage.
'COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS;All three of them?
24
'KEVIN CRANE;All three of them.
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
4'
19 IAny other questions of the applicant at this point?Go
20 ,ahead.
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:Okay.
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:We have a General Plan
the character of our neighborhood,this current design.
BRIAN KULMAN:I'm Brian Kulman and I live at 497
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:Okay.I'll reserve my
designed,in our neighborhood,which are all lovely,and
this is certainly in the character of those other homes and
the time being and I'm going to open the public hearing to
Brian Kulman.
be a lot bigger from the street and wouldn't fit with the
Bird Avenue,which is directly across from the Cranes'home.
It's a different address because we're on the corner and our
CHAIR MICCICHE:Any other questions at this
point?Seeing none,I'll ask the Applicant to sit down for
historical nature of having the garages in the back of the
lot.That's how we interpreted it.
front door is on the other street,but the longest side of
our house does face directly to their property.
I have seen the plans that they have shown us and
comments on that until later.Thank you.
1 KEVIN CRANE:I interpret it as exactly that,by
2 Ihaving a cellar we minimize the mass of the house,because
6
9
7
5
the other option would have been like an attached garage out
4 ,in front,which would have created a huge ...the house would
16
17
18
22
23
19 Ithe story poles as well,and I'd like tO,say that I approve
20 lof the project as well as the design,and especially Mr.
15
n
14
10
24
21 I Schlow's work,which he has several homes he's.worked on,
12
13
We'll probably go with the same type.KEVIN CRANE:
CHAIR MICCICHE:Sure.Could you state your name,
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:okay,that's crape myrtle
ANNA HUYNH:Can I add to that?
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:So you've actually
KEVIN CRANE:It will be slow growth.We have a
couple trees back there,slow growth Chinese trees.
the house,but we haven't put too much thought into the
and it was Chinese tallow,and Chinese tallow is not on the
please for the record?
ANNA HUYNH:My name is Anna Huynh and I'm an
owner of the property.We thought about the landscaping of
selected trees that you're going to plant?
policy,which states,"Encourage basements and cellars to
provide hidden square footage in lieu of visible mass."How
of trees that we currently have.
do you interpret that in light of your project?
I think approved Town tree list.
approved by the Town.
CHAIR MICCICHE:Okay,we'll take that.Thank you.
future plan,but we will plant whatever trees that are
2
1
4
5
14
15
17
10
n
18
21
22
23
24
13
16
12
25
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
5
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
6
The proposed structure does not block our view.1 Ihave any other speaker cards at this time,so I will call
2 IActually it blocks our view of undesirable things,which are
the backs of the apartment buildings on the street,Towne
2 Ithe Applicant back ~p for,I won't use the word rebuttal,
because I didn't hear anything bad from this guy.
4 ITerrace beyond.So the structure serves a nice purpose and KEVIN CRANE:We worked with the Town quite often,4
5 Ithe planning staff,with Sandy,and they were pretty
helpful,and with Randy.And so we incorporated from the
Historical Committee all the way up to here,and I think we
7
it's definitely advantageous to the neighbors.
I also understand their basement request and I'd
like to say that I support that as well,and I understand
6
9
came up in the joint effort with a verYpolid set of plans
that meets my needs and the Town's needs.That's all I have
10
11
12
13
14
how it fits,having that extra space and the way it's
designed,serves the particular family needs that they have.
It's very functional,and because it's in the back of the
home it's not visible.We wouldn't even ,know it was there
from our home or any otherhdme in the neighborhood,so I
don't see any harm to the neighbors in the design or the use
of having their basement as requested.
One benefit perhaps is that it allows the garage
10
11
12
13
14
to say.
CHAIR MICCICHE:Any questions of'the Applicant.
Commissioner Bourgeois.
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:The cellar issue,and
this might be just as much for Staff as it is for the
Applicant.So one of the things in front of us is
15 to remain where it is,which is set back from the front of
15 interpreting whether or not this deck can be considered an
my general support to the project.
speaker?Seeing none,thank you very much.I don't seem to
have that big of a structure,particularly a garage,more
visible'to the street in front of the house.So again,just
the home towards the back of the lot.I imagine if they were
not granted the use of the basement the way it is and had to
I believe it was actually Sandy thatRANDYTSUDA:
was caught before it went to DRC the ,final time,It was
extension of the home and so that basement area below the
caught it at the counter during a resubmittal process and it
deck should be counted as part of the FAR.And in their
letter they said they misinterpreted that and they assumed
it would be ...How did that process go through Staff?How
did that go over the DRC and what was Staff's opinion on
that 'being excluded from the FAR?
something that to be very frank we caught midstream.We did
17
24
16
21
23
25
18
19
22
20
Thank you.Any questions of theCHAIRMICCICHE:
make a change to the design,they might have to move the
garage and attach it to the house to get additional space,
which would not look as good or benefit the neighborhood to
24
16
19
25
17
23
18
20
21
22
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
7
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
8
1 Inot catch it at the initial review stage,and tech review is 1 lof the drawing there.And so that's how we plan to kind of
19 Ipurpose of putting ...
2 Inormally roughly three weeks after the application is
18 I courtyard from the rest of the yard,and can you tell the
21 Ithat the cellar portion of it be under the deck and we're
This is a question.Is
Commissioner Quintana.
Well both.I view that as th~10'
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:
KEVIN CRANE:
CHAIR MICCICHE:
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:So will that become your
CHAIR MICCICHE:Yeah.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:So there will be a rail?
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:And what are you putting
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:Because it's 4'.Okay,
RANDY TSUDA:Commissioner,on sheet A4 there'S a
there a connection between the subterranean courtyard and
would probably be grass and flowers up;in that area,and
then the courtyard would be 4'below that.
the deck?
KEVIN CRANE:Probably don't have any features
there.I was just thinking large flowerpots of maybe a small
fence around it or something.
for safety features so people don't falloff of the yard
into the courtyard?Do you have a feature there?
useable space?
section through the structure that illustrates that
courtyard and 'per a building code there is a rail that's
required around that courtyard.
3
4 Iyard,or is the 10'to the fence going to be your yard,your
6
2 'incorporate it.
9
7
8
11
20
14
22
12
10
21 Ithat's what I was looking for.
16
24
17
19
23
25
15
13
18
KEVIN CRANE:The way we kind of designed it is
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:Thank you.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:I do.I'm looking at your
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:No.
CHAIR MICCICHE:No question of the Applicant?
CHAIR MICCICHE:Commissioner Quintana,did you
after that process midstream.We brought it to the
Applicant's attention and we had a meeting to discuss the
implications and how that cellar policy is worded and talked
about their options at that point,and they decided to
pursue an interpretation of the cellar policy.
have a question?
Commissioner Talesfore.
the site by the way-how is that integrated into the rest of
the backyard?Is it a deck?How are you delineating that
submitted.We did not catch it at tech review.It was caught
subterranean courtyard and I'm just wondering-I did visit
going to have doors that go from that cellar into the
courtyard right there 4'underneath the topsoil of the
ground,we can barbegue and so forth there,and then you can
go up the stairs to the ground level on the left-hand side
6
7
11
14
22
12
10
20
16
17
25
13
23
24
15
-LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 'Chester Street
9
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
10
2 Ileft there would be stairs to go up to the ground level
area.I think we had a couple of plans.I can't see the
1 KEVIN CRANE:As you go out the courtyard on the RANDY TSUDA:If the Commission upholds the
2 Icurrent interpretation of the cellar policy,you're asking
are we recommending that you grant a bonus FAR?No.
plans right now.Have we got stairs to the deck on that
side?
4
5
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:Okay.
CHAIR MICCICHE:Yes,Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:No,on the opposite side.
had stairs on both sides of the deck.I think we submitted
7
KEVIN CRJI.NE:The opposite side.At one point we 7
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL:Again,let me just throw
this out because I'd kind of like to hear what my fellow
commissioners think.
10
11
12
13
14
15
it just on one side.I guess you'd walk around to the right
of it up back on the deck,or you can go inside the house
and go on the second level and get to the deck that way.
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:Thank you.
CHAIR MICCICHE:Any other questions of the.
Applicant?That being the case,I'm going to close the
public hearing and open it up to a motion,comments,or
questions of Staff.Yes,Commissioner Quintana.
10
11
12
13
14
15
I went out and looked at it too and that back
porch is not a very substantial structure;I.guess I should
say it that way.What I worry about is the precedential
value I guess of this decision,because it's almost like you
go build some deck in the backyard,and then you put a
cellar underneath it,and then whether the deck stays or
goes doesn't really make much difference because now you've
got your cellar.I mean I can see that people aren't going
16 COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:Question of Staff.I want 16 to be able to see it,it's not going to probably hurt
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
an interpretation of what the Staff Report says.It says,
"Staff finds in the case the cellar under the deck will not
increase the mass of the proposed home and will not be
visible to neighbors.In addition,the underdeck portion of
the cellar is sma+ler than the cellar area that's permitted
under a typical attached two car garage."Is this statement
intended to mean that Staff supports exceeding the FAR
should the Commission interpret the cellar policy as not
including or exempting the area under the deck?
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
anybody,but I'm afraid if you say this is a cellar ...
To me the clear intent of a cellar is basically
under the structure of the house.The front of that house
has a front porch,but I don't have any doubt that that
front porch is part of the house,so to the extent that the
cellar is under'the front porch I don't have any problem.
But you go into the backyard and you see this
connection,and I just think if you say that's somehow the
structure under which you can build cellars,there'S almost
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
11
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
12
from.
of whether we're going to allow that FAR.
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:I would agree with the
made them remove it,it would make no visible difference to
While we were doing that we kept bumping into the
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:I would like to give some
CHAIR MICCICHE:That's fine.Commissioner
background and the history of that General Plan amendment
charged with putting into words and wordsmithing the ideas
I,along with Michael Burke,previous Planning
Commissioner and previous Councilperson Linda Lubeck,were
more living spaCe,and we looked at it and said how can we
increasing the intensity of already developed lots.But we
hidden square footage in lieu of visible mass."And it seems
like they maxed out the visible mass and added a cellar,so
it almost seems like double dipping to me,and that's where
I'm personally having a struggle.
Quintana.
.1 think the bigger question for me is,something
Commissioner Quintana alluded is this General Plan policy
that says,"Encourage basements and cellars to ~rovide
and its intent.
on a subcommittee of the General Plan Committee,which was
also recognized that there was a desire for people to have
balance the two,and we came up with this policy.
issue of the fact that while the town was primarily'built
out,there seemed to be an increasing trend towards
7
2
8
5
4
1
23
24
22
14
19
10
13
12
11
16
17
20
21
that came out of the General Plan Committee,and one of the
things we were charged with was developing a community
18 Idevelopment element.'
25
.15
I'm going to make a comment.I·CHAIR MICCICHE:
why that's wrong.
case,would I consider allowing the additional square
the FAR here rather than saying it isn't part of it.It is
think your interpretation is very correct.To me it's going
to become more of a question of if we allow an extension of
clearly in my mind part of the square footage;so let me
doing,so your cellar becomes the size of your backyard,and
or not,because ·of the way it's been done in this specific
while I'm very sympathetic with what they're trying to
accomplish,I really worry that to say this is a cellar is
such a stretch of I think the reasonable language of that it
would be hard to justify.I'd love to hear people tell me
state that first.So the only question in my mind is whether
the mass and scale of the home.There would be no visible
difference,so I think you're right.I think it's a question
no limit to what you can do to have an underground house in
footage on.this property?s6 that's where I'd be coming
your backyard.The exception gets swallowed by what you're
Chair.I think clearly it's got to be under the building and
I don't think we want to start going with decks.But if we
7
23
11
24
10
12
13
15
14
17
16
18
19
25
22
20
21
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4~54 Chester Street
13
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
14
The intent of it was to fulfill the desire for the
bigger house,but at the same time not increasing the
visible intensity of the house on the site so that we
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:I ditto.But what I do
want to bring up are a couple of other areas that I noticed,
and even though we don't have neighbors here complaining,
4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
wouldn't be ultimately impacting the character of existing
neighborhoods.What we meant by ,that was that if you were
going to have a basement,we didn't want you to max out the
square footage on the top,because we were trying to get
that intensity reduced and hidden in a basement or cellar.
So the way I look at this particular proposal,I
agree that it's double dipping.In addition,it has
increased the mass of the building because'it has raised the
;
building 4'to,get that cellar underneath,'so I don't think
it meets the intent of the policy,not even considering the
issue of the interpretation of cellars under a deck,which I
thoroughly agree with everybody who has spoken on that
already.
The Town Council policy and the Planning
Commission policy on basements does not deal with the intent
of the General Plan amendment,it simply defines what a
basement is and the parameters within which it must stay,
4
5
6
7
10
11'
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
when I visited the site what I was struck with was ho~the
house as designed now seems to be pinching its adjacent
house,its adjacent neighbor,and when I looked at the
impacts I'm seeing visibility impacts to that second story
and maybe even some of the first Story a,s well as shadowing.
It's in our plans if you haven't looked at it.
I was really taken aback by the amount of
shadowing,and I don't know,I think it's our responsibility
as planning commissioners to consider,especially in a
demolition,that when they put a house back I believe the
General Plan says that it should be put back in keeping with
the same style and mass that was originally there.Not the
largest on the street maybe,not the smallest,or not the
same;somewhere in the mid-range.But the shadowing really
bothered me a lot and I'm hoping that can be somehow
reduced.I find it very impactful.So those are my concerns
as well.
20 thow far it can intrude into side yard setbacks and rear yard 20 CHAIR MICCICHE:Are you suggesting a redesign
comment.Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:
21
22
23
24
25
set backs,et cetera,but it doesn't deal at all with
whether the proposed cellar of a house meets the intent of
the General Plan policy.So just to meet the definition,it
doesn't do it.
CHAIR MICCICHE:That's fine.
21
22
23
24
25
then?
are-something.
CHAIR MICCICHE:
Maybe,yes.A redesign or
Okay,that's fine.We heard your
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
15
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
16
20 Ilot.
2 I same problem.My difficulty with that neighborhood is it's
like every house that gets built out there now is doing the
same thing.So then it becomes very difficult because you're
1 I everything everybody said about the cellar.It should be a
20 Istatement that the house was compatible with the
I also asked Staff the question of what the
CHAIR MICCICHE:Commissioner Quintana.
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:I also went to the site
and I used the site to run through the exercise in the
details,like window shape and door shape and that kind of
thing.So it really pointed out to me at what point do we
affect the character of the neighborhood?
in the neighborhood ..There were two other reasons,but I
can't remember what they are unfortunately,but they did not
include compatibility of mass and scale with the
see some mass cut on that house.
handbook on the Residential Design Guidelines.It was a very
interesting experience because basically what I concluded
based on that is the only common feature in the neighborhood
that had more than three checkmarks was single-family house.
Other than that,all the features that were common were
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:And what I think you were
speaking to as well is the intensity of the development.
It's almost overwhelming,and I really feel badly about all
that,but some lots just can't take that much intensity of
the building or the mass I guess is what I'm saying.
7
5
8
4
6
2 Iway to cut mass and this doesn't do it,and I'd sure like to
24
23
11
18
14
15
19
13
25
10
12
17
21 Ineighborhood was based on,and the answer I got was from the
project manager was that there were other two-story houses22
16
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL:I was impressed with the
CHAIR MICCICHE:They're small lots.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL:That doesn't seem
I do like the concept of using a cellar to reduce
COMMISSIO~ER QUINTANA:On a 5,000 square foot
within a (inaudible)range have exactly done that.
consistent with the policy,I agree with you.
the mass.It wasn't done here.So it's almost like saying
and I'm not saying this critically-I am saying people really
want to get every square foot they can.A lot of the houses
so they take every single possible square foot,because this
house goes from 1,300 square feet or something to 3,600
square feet.
saying you can't do it but stx of your neighbors just did
it.I know not immediate neighbors,but that neighborhood-
maybe the need for that,but boy,we're sure jamming a lot
you want your cellar,reduce some mass.But I also agree
with you that do we really want to have the houses designed
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL:On a 5,000 square foot
lot,yeah,3,625.I mean I'm sympathetic with the desire and
of house on a little,small lot,and it upsets me.But I
just focused on the cellar issue and I think I agree with
1
5
8
11
24
23
14
13
15
10
19
17
18
12
22
21
16
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
17
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
18
1 I neighborhood.Then I asked how do you determine that,and
2 (she said,"We simply assume that if the architect says it's
looked a·t the homes in the table..My response was not
2 lintended to imply that we only look at the numbers in the
architecturally compatible,that's it's compatible with the table.It was simply these are the homes ~hat we look at in
4 Idefining neighborhood.
5
neighborhood."I also asked Randy how Staff looked at it,
and he indicateq they look at the table that's included in 5 COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:In that case I apologize,
7
10
our Staff Report.
To make a long story short,I looked at the table,
I tossed out the biggest and the smallest,I came up with
the average size of 1,703 feet,which is slightly smaller
than the average listed on the table,including the biggest
and the smallest,and then I looked at what was the median
because I thought I asked what do you look at for
neighborhood compatibility.
RANDY TSUDA:No,you asked What did you consider
8
the neighborhood when you were evaluating compatibility,and
I answered the homes on the table.
10
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:Okay.If I misspoke,I'm
12
11
12
13
size,and that was about 1,740 to 1,750 feet,which is
closest to the average listed in the table.
So even looking at that,I would say that that
13
compatibility.But even if you just look at those hqmes,
most of them are not as massive and as complicated a design
14
15
figure is more compatible with the neighborhood,taking an
average,not forcing them into the smallest and not forcing
14
15
as this one.It's a beautiful design,but I'm not sure it
fits on this lot.
16 them into the biggest,and still in the long run that
16 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL:We're kind of maybe
18 Ileast at a more gradual level.
17 I average,or median,is going to constantly go up,but at'17
18
getting a consensus.If we decide that this is too big and
it's too bulky,I would kind of like to know one,obviously,
19 lif that's the case,whether there is a consensus or not,butRANDYTSUDA:Mr.Chair?19
20 CHAIR MICCICHE:Yes.20 jtwo,what we're really saying.Because what Lee said would
21 RANDY TSUDA:If I may clarify my response to 21 Isuggest that perhaps the reduction of I guess a couple
RANDY TSUDA:The question was what did you look
at when you were evaluating neighborhood,and I said I
22
23
24
25
commissioner Quintana.
CHAIR MICCICHE:You certainly may.
22
23
24
25
hundred square feet of the above cellar bulk would get it
down to the ·average if I understood you correctly,
I'll let you respond to me in a moment,but I'm
just .saying I always feel bad about these things because
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
19
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
20
were to turn it down because of its bulk,size,et cetera,
1 Iwhat people want to do,I'm very empathetic with it.If we
it does come back to us,they'll have had a little help.
it would be nice if we could kind of say something about
CHAIR MICCICHE:I agree.I ~gree.It's small lot.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:May I make a comment?
CHAIR MICCICHE:You can make any comment you
5
5 Ipornography:you know it when you see it,and boy that is
every inch you can get on that.
7
1 Ismall setback,and it's going to be two stories,and I'll
2 I tell you,I·sure wouldn't want to live next door.So I'm not
saying anything real sophisticated,and I have a great
4 Irespect for Larry Cannon.On the other hand,it's like
My only comment on that is I'veCHAIRMICCICHE:
where we're coming from on it,so if we do turn it down and
worked with our consulting architect for a good many years
system forme.I tend to read what he says and try to go
no~.Since he's come aboard he's really streamlined the
5
4
with that concept.Even though I'm hearing that we see some
thinks the project looks pretty good,and he has a far
better eye than myself and a lot of other people on that
basis in looking at drawings and coming to that conclusion.
I believe he is referencing theCHAIRMICCICHE:
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:What I would say about
want.
Mr.Cannon's assessment is that he was assessing the design
appropriateness to the site,and so that being said,yes
it's a good design,but the question is,is that a good
design to the site and the neighborhood?
of the structure.He's made no comment about its
15
12
15
13
11
14
10
But forget the drawings.COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL:
mass and bulk issues that may be there because they've gone
to the limit of the FAR,what I read with him is that he
Just look at the story poles.
11
15
10
15
12
14
13
19 lis story poles alone always look massive to me,from my
20 Iview.
17 Isite in his statement.
21 Inot going to argue with you.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:And I don't have any
CHAIR MICCICHE:That's fine.No,that's good.I'm
quibble with a second story.It's just it's over the mass
and the scale that it should be.
23
24
18
20
22
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:Right.That's how I
19 Ilooked at it.It's over the limit.
COMMISS~ONER QUINTANA:I need to talk.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL:When you go out there and
CHAIR MICCICHE:I know,and I think what happens
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:I need to talk.
fence,you don't have to know anything about how bulky
you try to walk between the exterior story poles and the
23
24
17
18
21
22
25
anything looks to realize that that is now a very,very 25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Ghester Street
21
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
22
Randy,I have a question for you then.I'm not 1 Ileft,maybe in terms of reducing the bulk of the second
sure where we're going to go with this,but if we were to
deny it or send it back,I'm a little concerned about
story.It would be helpful to hear that kind of input from
the Commission.
sending it back with directions,because sometimes that 4 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:So is that a redesign to
alludes to the fact that it just needs a little tweaking.I
don't know about that in this case.I think I've heard so
many big things about this that maybe it just needs a total
redesign.
5
6
Staff?
RANDY TSUDA:Depending on what the consensus is,
it's sounding to me like ...at this point the comments I've
heard are a substantial redesign.
CHAIR MICCICHE:You can send it back with the CHAIR MICCICHE:Yeah,it's significant enough
direction that it has to be reduced in mass and bulk.
10
11
12
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:Well,but then you get
into how much.
CHAIR MICCICHE:Well,then you're going to have
10
11
12
that if you can't leave it to the satisfaction ...
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:So fundamentally we're
looking for a new design?
CHAIR MICCICHE:Yeah,that's what it comes down
13
14
to look at another design.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:Well then I want it to
13
14
to.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:Okay.Thank you.
15 come back to us if that's the case.But Randy,what would
15 CHAIR MICCICHE:Somebody want make a motion?
16
17
you suggest?
RANDY TSUDA:It's always helpful to the Applicant
H
n
COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:
say first if I may.
No.I have something to
19 lean say it afterwards.
18 land to Staff if you can provide'us some guidance in terms of
19 Iwhat you're specifically looking for.I've heard a square
18 CHAIR MICCICHE:No,I'm requesting a motion.You
20 I footage number thrown out.There"may be guidance in terms o.f 20 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL:I'll make the motion.
21 I increasing that site'S setback that you were concerned 21 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:No,I'm going to make it.
reducing the shadow impacts on that adjacent neighbor to the
RANDY TSUDA:Any maybe guidance in terms of
motion to refer the application back to Staff for further
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:Okay,I want to make a
Would you make the motion,CHAIR MICCICHE:
please?23
24
25
22
Yeah.COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:
about.
25
23
22
24
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
23
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/8/2006
Item #4,54 Chester Street
24
T
H
n•
w
b
w
G
w
ro
r
O
3
G
O
E
N
a)
w
IT
H
m
Q)
-.i
'Cf
O
G
-14
U
- 0
m
E
m
m
O
to
G
3
7
t)
C
m
w
0
m
C
L
w
Q
C
7
0
0
.C
N
H
-
L
1
O
r
O
-Hi
O
tl
N
-
E
- I
L
.41
w
O
O
L
1J
N
-.a
w
H
L
V
L
m
'O
E
w
-N
w
w
o
w'
G
m
r_
m
•H
o
L
m
m
W
L
>
E
O
>
JJ
w
L
ro
m
w
w
m
04
L
a
;
-•i
w
w
O
O
H
b
N
H
-f-'
m
m
O~
w
O
A
rJ
w
E
w
O
m
+1
(a
"
.C
.C
m
3
A
m
O
14
JJ
O
G
G
N
L
.C
m
a)
11
C
a
11
A
ro
w
O
A
b
A
C
w
a)
w.
N
-Hi
3
w
w
4
"
U
m
N
.X
p+
O
O
H
G
M
W
d
ro
•ri
C
O)
L
N
•ri
w
m
m
a1
m
O
U
G
G
H
O
m
C
H
7+
a7
E
'O
•.a.
O
O
3
JJ
w
H
3
H
A
r
w
O)
.
41
yi
-r)
N
O
L)
m
O
O
m
m
H
li
O
m
m
C
::3
H
b
G
w
w
H
O
w
0
-
7
-.i
A
0
•A
C
O
m
N
al
w
w
Hi
.C
b
N
tP
0
0
a
.u
O
.G
> -
E
U
C1)
m
G
•d
.G
to
U)
m
-i
ro
a)
7
A
E
w
m
JI-
w
G
m
m
H
.C
m
H
H
m
.G
-
G
-1'
(1)
(a
m
X.
H
a)
.G
a)
-
.x
m
0
H
H
m
G
O
Cl. .
w
u
H
u
b
H
0
O
w
-,4
v)
E
3
u
m
A
G
m
O
L
W
E
O
A
(1)
n
W
W
M
L)
W
b
a
O
H
Q
a
w
11
H
H
a
s
m
N
a
H
3
m
4
4)
°
o
'
o
m
H
w
G
o
41
a)
4
m
w
w
y
.
w
a
i
~
a
Q
F
ri
N
W
I
~
W
C
y
W
O
N
2
E
2
to
W
O
H
a
j
w
W
m
G
•
a
m
a
D
•H
i
v
~
b
O
FC
FC
li
O
b
C
Ei
w
H
w
A
W
x
d
ro
W
x
O
U
=1
H
io
ri
A
-~J
A
F
H
ro
ra
F
A
d
w
C
a
41
u
a
ro
u
a
ro
>
x
w
a
a
G
G
a
ai
a
o
W
H
W
m
H
w
a)
H
.-1
A
W
W
0
O
C4
H
z
G
u
z
u
z
H
H
W
w
„
z
z
U
z
o
o
z
e
0
i
u
0
o
u
o
m
N
H
0
0
w
o
E
H
CD
0
H
W
H
H
L
H
H
O
::I
SS
O
H
H
N
H
H
U
m
w
£
m
£
w
li
.u
m
a1
m
m
O
w
m
G
w
Cl)
m
w
O
m
w
[n
U
• i
w
m
m
u
L
E
m
w
c
co
H
H
4
a
H
R:
H
G
m
ry
m
H
H
00
m
H
>
L
H
m
£
£
rd
r
C
0
rd
'
b
0
x
O
O
y
3
0
-
E
F,
b
>
,j
v
o
O
d
U
N
U
U
ro
U
u
H
(3)
u
u
0
U
U
M
q
y
u
U
~
m
b
U
H
w
3
C
.k
::5
ro
m
y
m
m
G
w
.U
01
a
m
o
•H
0
3
m
i
mm
E
o
m
,
>
u
m
co
C
p
X
-1
w
.44
G
u
U
,
H.
i
?
to
O
J j
C
m
i
r'.
w
C
Q)
4
H
H
i
C4
JJ
3
H
M
13
H
G
'd
tn.
u
ro
o
w
a
b
o
m
w
m
w
o
H
ro
c
b
w
44
~
v
O
y
y
w
m
H
A
m
m
e
m
o
~
d
N
m
a
)n
)u
n
m
m
o
H
ri
N
N
N
m
H
a
N
u)
N
in
H
n
H
m
N
m
H
o
N
H
N
N
N
m
N
a
N
0
0
co
\ j
N ~
H co
cil
m H
H w
£ N
O U
z L'
H to
nIV
a
0 J
H
C~
0
a
N
H
w
A
w
t1
n.
m
H
i]
41
a1
m
•H
G
H
w
o
m
m
ro
w
m
m
O
N
m
w
y
J.
a)
u
u
n.
a
i
b
w
Sa
m
41
1J
O
0
E
x
ro
H
to
U
,s~
w
m
41
U
R
C
O
0
0
H
a
m
(o
o
y
4.)
A
m
3
w
O
to
G
w
G
H
o
m
w
i
:j
m
o
w
o
ro
m
w
41
H
41
A
m
m
3
>
U)
a
Hi
tT
L
O
.C
w
'Q)
O
m
m
w
m
,G
O
O.
w
r,
rJ
•H~
A
O
£
d
0
-
H
C
w
O
w
7
C
G
w
b
w
m
to
O
X
H
m
•d
m
H
H
m
E
w
m
G
A
q
u
-ri
w
ro
w
E
E
E
m
4
o
w
U)
ro
m
,G
0
C
~j
~
ro
x
H
ro
U
C
S
U
02
H
H
~
N
b
G
co
n•
E
N
b
W
m
01
b
•H
w
>
a)
-.i
1..)
E
£
7
U
>r
O
Q
J=i
F
A
O
a)
w
O
-ri
a
r-i
-ri
,C
ro
£
N
q
>
ro
A
w
m
b
it
A
H
U
W
ro
W
m
W
O
E
7
W
L
ri
n.
H
m
H
•H
U
a4
A
FC
1:4
H
P4
N
a
m
C
O)
H
7.
7
w
A
ro
O
i)
z
0
0
O
0
G
.U
O
W
C
m
C
0
0
•H
w
W
FC
W
W
W
w
E
O
H
W
m
•H
.u
01
3
m
z
m
w
H
m
0
CO
H
m
r.
W
>1
C
.x
-rI
ww
'A
z
wW
a
WW
w
C
W
-ri
m
w
C
H
H
a
O
H~
A
m
b
51
m
K
-
µ
0
O
~4
C
A
H
W.
E
w
d
H
PQ
E
W
W
w
N
O
W
w
'O
C
w
0
-H
w
O
x
u
P4
0
•H
a
. 9
W
a
x
U
x
U
A
a
H
x
U
H
C
H
1)
X:
O)
H
w
H
W
W
ww
W
H
r~
H
O
W
w
H
C
W
U
U
41
C
U
2
W)
2
z
2
z
U
q
U
u
Z
A
U
O
N
w
•H
U
O
O
O
O
O
O
U
w
,7
U
O
U
>•i
m
H
3
H
H
O
H
H
H
H
H
ra
m
H
H
H
U
H
w
-ri
m
O
£
m
H
m
cn
cn
m
£
A
H
£
m
m
0
£
m
k
b
.X
ro
m
m
m
m
m
-ri
H
m
r
(n
U
m
a
m
a
H
a)
n•
H
H
H
H
a
ro
i
>
x
H
HH
a
m
W
b
A
A
m
£
rL
q
2
rC
`u
£
ro
r-1
0
0
0
o.
~
x
O
w
m
m
G
u
u
ty)
w
u
U
u
u
u
fwx
u
m
u
0
u
.
O)
m
•H
r,
w
3
W
44
N
0
b
44
~
3
O
)
.C
N
3
ro
H
.
m
m
m
-
L)
X
H
H
b
w
E
w
7
b
Q4
E
w
7
O
n.
O
G
HH
U
E
0
0
O
A
w
•H
w
C
3
w
m
A
w
•HI
3
m
m
y
H
m
m
m
a1
H
U
41
ro
r-i
ri
N
m
.a
in
~u
n
m
m
o
HI
ri
.-I
N
H
H
N
H
H
H
N
N
N
N
m
N
a
N
N
N
Ln
N
ry
\
m
N w
w
O Hi
~ m
w
H w
t1
m
O U
H )f)
P
P4
E
H
O
O
a
N
m
a)
H
m
rn
N
G
ai
x
ai
,C
a
a)
a
N
C
a)
O
U
a)
-H
N
L
L
W
r-)
C
u
G
X
+
m
x
H
7
0
N
O
>
H
H
m
ry
a)
m
'O
m
O
.
m
U
3
m'
i)
7
E
L
N
ro
L
O
a)
.0
m
A
C
ro
A
H
(d
4-)
u
u
o
N
u
JJ
O)
u
(11
C
.
u
z
C
(L)
a)
b
ra
m
0
a)
m
O
3
a)
(a
H
a)
.U
O
L
M
A
0
w
G
O
N
m
G
r
L
JJ
H
H
a~
i
(a
L
J-1
L
JJ
H
z
u
-
CQ
Ji
'H
m
a)
ID -
a)
H
v
C
L
N
of
o
A
ro
A
o
b
v
.C
G
tP
m
ro
O
tr)
A
l.J
to
C
a
.X
W
>
A
3
o
0
ro
.C
7
G
m
m
,C
C.
w
v
N
ro
-
m
v
~
E
a
3
-
a
A
a
C
b
.G
H
N
~
.u
O
3
v-
u
A
N
3
X
v
U
H
A
v
co
ro -
E
tr)
C
r-i
b
u
X
- O
X
0
m
G
C
U
b
(l-
ro
A
b
H
H
a)
z
m
z
N
m .
ri
7
•H
,j
J.
(a
U)
H
O
(L)
O
G
z H
x
U
A
0
b
-
A
L
A
L
O
E
L
-N
C
m
L
L
H
H
H
H
o)
G
a)
r-)
ro
N
a)
3
U
O
U
O 1i
H U)
H
L
.C
H
ro
3
3
H
al
.C
N
E
H
)a
H
O
m
ro
w
O
1",
ro
L
b
x
O
r-I
a)
A
O
Jj
m H
H W
JJ
JJ
E
•r+
m
-H
H
C
(D
U
F
w
-rl
H
a
L
`
N
H
a
w
H
(15
m
.G
al
H
A
N
N
a)
m
ri
G
N
z
m
m
'd
w
a)
ly
m
o a
r4
a
r
O)
a
O
L
v
a)
0
O
L
H
X
m
L
O
'd
z
U .a)
o
w
o
ro
w
.
N
a
)
o
m
ro
m
z
A
z
01
C
u
w
zz
ro
22
J
H
H
W
E
(a
>
-a
H
m
o
m
rC
z
H
z
-ri
u
a)
ro
a)
3
U
H
m
3
z w
W
O
H
O
H
4
O
a)
H
TS
H In
q
q
-H
v
C
m
-ri
O
r,
u
A
ro
0
G
o
0
a
A
3
G
E
ro
(D
0
w
3
W
O
m
W
O
N
m
o
0-
a)
-H
0
4
L
1J
N
H
x
w
0
x
'd
-C
-
G
N
4
H
3
u
0
O
-rt
X
b
b
~
w'
U
W
3
N
U
G'
0
H
3
N
x
z
JJ
W
•H
ro
C
H
N
U
Q)
C
W
W
H
W
z
H
W
o
N
O
N
$
•Y.•
m
L
la
E
z
U
Z
H
0
U
z
L)
3
-
-ri
o
Ci
H
-
b)
1)
JJ
A
C
m a)
O
U
O
0
4
U
O
N
N
A
m
L
C
L
C
z
ro
N
O
H
H
H
>
H
H
A
H
a7
3
a)
3
a$
•rl
m
O
A
C
m
3
m
F H
U)
8
m
a)
N
m
u
m
rn
m
E
ro
c
u
a
-H
U)
E
FC
m
O
ca
C
ri
m
-H
L'
C
A
O
L
to
U
U
-n
JJ
-rI
m
.-i
C7
H
rx
E
H
H
3
.U
ro
u
b
z
H
O
ll
N
U
'd
m
H
H
H
O
4
X
O
ro
C
a
H
E
•H
U
O
U
m
a)
U
N
C
C
C
u
O
H
TS
>
A
O
o
10
o
-
rn
o
a)
G
x
rd
m
m
a)
o
m
w
-
m
v
ro
a
U
U
(d
U
C
U
U
. H
H
H
•rl
u
,G
Ja
m
•r+
O
0
A
E
-
b
v
a)
•H
d)
ro
r~
u
0 1
rn
w
rd
G
.q
a3
Jj
o
u
.
0
A
ra
C
rd
a
.u
.
C
-r~
J.1
Q)
m
. .
O
(a
A.
Cn
to
G
U
H
A
-a
U
3
w
q
L
H
•H
H
C
a)
`
a)
b
A
E
JJ
C
O
-H
w
(a
m
O
'd
m
.H
E
G
w
1J
G
E
-H
-H
-
H
C9
. C
(1)
N
a)
(a
0
-H
ro
-r(
O
H
q -
JJ
v
a)
•d
ri
U
b
b
m
C
X
u
-H
m
E
a
u
i
b
C
•H
ro
C
u
a)
rd
a)
0
a
ro
m
G
JJ
•H
w
k
G
v
H
o
H
o
G
ro
o)
ro
,a~
z
•rl
O
a)
w
S
ro
lJ
(a
JJ
H
3
(a
N
L
A
JJ
L
rl
N
m
W
Ul
b
r
!D
Ol
O
H
N
d
N
IO
r
W
T
O
H
N
T
I11
H
H
rl
rl
H
H
r-I
ri
H
H
N
N
N
N
N
N
JJ
r
•r{
co
N
m
bl
-rl
U
w
U
U
JJ
C
.94
-H
0
N
td
•
u
H
H
n.
H
b
,
J.
~
O
m
a
A
a
H
ro
a
H
x
u
(a
H
r-i
N
3
ro
-H
U
C
P,
ri
H
a
0
G
s
0
H
o
ro
H
a)
ro
u
o
u
o
G
w
ca
ro
ri
U
H
G
X
3
m
o
a
~o
O
IH
m
E
cl
a
o
y
N
Q)
H
(1
O
3
b
G
a)
b
E
ri
w
,q
v
(U
A
E
Q)
a)
3
a)
H
ro
C14
ro
H
a)
a)
b
(a
'd
z
(D
41
b
C
.-J
a)
co
' m
r
w
,C
C7
O)
m
w
A
C
O
b
H
C
y
G
O
O
L
G
O
a)
Il
41
rn
ro
U
G
a)
m
N a)
a)
a)
-H
41
>
0
O
C
u
m
ro
U
C7
m
a
m
u
m
a
ro
x
ro
y
u
G
o
m
m
y
z p
E
N
3
J-)
U
m
E
A
O
A
A
Q)
U
O u
O
J-)
a)
O
z
ro
a)
a)
E
b
J-)
l~
C
b)
.C
H m
u
'a
H
H
,
v
A
v
G
•H
a)
•H
m
4J
U
m
j.•
H
a)
0
J.)
$
is
H
H
H
N
C
R$
x
N H
0
H
O
O
M
P
H
3
m
A
O
0
4
4-4
H W
4
u
w
o
a)
tr
G
7
N
N
a3
u
-H
JJ
N
-ri
O
£ -W
w
"
u
U
~
3
0 0)
FC
r
~
r-{
-
i
FC
X
a
+
>
a
~
a
U
E
a
FC
C
U 4
z
r
C
rd
w
a
q
,
Z
A
m
w
O
C
a)
H
r
-i
~
FC
2
O
x
.C
i
a
G
2
A
'
i
H
%
J-)
w
~
N
•rl
H
to
J
H
H
r
-I
)
I
q
z
w
a
U
H
a
.N
z
- 3
of
A
W
W
N
O
W
W
F
m
W
C
El
A
r•C
O
16
x
u
x
3
x
x
r-)
x
ri
C
u
a
H
a
u
x
x
w
u
a
u
a
u
x
-
U
C4
C4
o
a
m
W
tJ
H
L
w
CP
H
L
W
H
H
WW
a)
H
C
~7
W
U
m
E
A
z
G
U
z
ro
u
ro
z
u
u
z
u
u
a)
z
2
(a
m m
O
-r+
U
m
O
H
U
1.
O
U
O
U
O
U
E
O
O
a)
O a)
H
H
X
H
ro
H
z
H
3
H
H
H
H
H
m
H
ro
H
H
a)
ri
H H
H
m
r-I
£
V)
O
£
CD
£
m
.C
£
m
m
r-1
FC
a)
m
ro
L
m
U
N
CO)
m
m
U
m
m
O
Q)
U
3
H
J.1
(x
r
H
C
Ri
H
PS
H
w'
H
0i
0
H
H
1J
~r
£
H
z
Q)
H
.I.J
H
H
£
H
G
m
f
°
o
~
°
A
o
u
o
x
x
o
o
o
v
o
o
m
a
U
H
U
u
J
U
F
U
U
U
U
U
3
U
- N
U
U
r,
U
C
N
X
G
-ra
m
A
G
O
•Xr)
ro
n
U
m
N
-H
m
r-I
JJ
b
u
E
v
b
U
-
i
(d
O.
C
H
a)
H
m
C
X
E
•rt
C
w
O
a)
-C
JJ
O
_r
•H
N
N
O
O
O
a
u
u
•H
a
1j
ro
•r(
U
a
a
b
rl
N
m
a~
N
b
r
m
41
O
H
N
d~
V)
IO
O
rl
N
Ill
H
N
H
r-1
N
N
H
N
H
H
N
N
N
N
N
N
a) W
a E E C
A O
) 3 A 4 n• a a) y 0 H L
bi n. W
l
C Ol X -ri a 0) a L w G A G C
G •H 3 i A A ro r - O H ro O O a) O
N H m 1 O .a O •r+ co E x
N A X C 'U C ro 3 u i) 1) A G
m ll i U L a) (D O ro -A O m b H m
E N m N b 3 tit E A N -r♦ a) a) U
G a A G•+ C O C 3 N C (V m b -ri
O ro •n -ri U C ro r O O O X N H H
A 0) ro X E 3 " E ro C C C1
y N b •rGi •f~) -r°i u O (D b- G ro N b N m 3 b
M a 4 O )-I O O U) a) X -A A )-I
t b H
-C E 3 v ij r-4 a U 04 ~4 N u
W E G
U H E A > ro O v C G C C
C A H O m_ ra _ H N H E G li 3 y O a) L
b ro b m G m w C a ro O m ro m m
a) a) y A W a) b A >a 3 X
3 A x
tx >r q a L v i U O d o
H u b O O U
[4 C +j q 3 +j E H A N E m m
al N 'U N m X al C N m y A
W x a W H > A W U N wl •rt 3 b A ro W b
a U a a y w a a a ro a rx rC G w y x a C
O b W O z 3 N O tT C O A U O z a) O H 3 0 a)
w A z w K[~C as .C w K w FC U 3 w N
m L 0 m a) 3 N 1) W ro W co H ro w m
W ro O W z E O w aW E W 7. .U al H a) ,.0 7 al
i-] m fa a ] L ro H C O FC U 3 ] M A ~C (a r:C 3
F a) O H O A a) b F W O F O W a b L N F L
A y 1) A' ra )i O :4 C dC O -A 0 m
w' y a' a p; N A O w' N U a w' U r-i 3 0l w 4
W W WW W ro r rd N W H N W w W U
z z z z H a) E a) z A U -H U N a) C 0 7.
O a7 000 •,a I 3 a) O •ra U 00 U a N O U O C
H E H H H N N 'O H H H G H H H T a C H O
m a co m m A w o a) - cn a) £ O m m a) ro l co -.i
m H m m m L O N (d a) ca X m co }-I } U i) m a)
H££ 0 H H H a1 -'I r" 3 H -ri LL L H H O F4 H Q) N L H U
O N 0 0 O .C f-i 4J N M 0 b ~ ~ 0 0 z x A A 9, u O )i
U A U U U " O •ri H U H U a) U {J ra u O 0 w U m
4J w ?i a) a A $4 G }-r N A
b) 0 ro ° W 0 3 °i O O O 0
C O -•i a) H •'I L a) L) L O G
-rt N N (L) i) H ro G 3 a) 4 ro
U a) a) N U N A O A U) U
7 C y 3 C a) U C 3 (D )j v., a)
'O _H a N ro al L U O •H a x
a) O H N O ri H si G 0 a) C O O (5
H CL U 3 U b A, y O E A b U) E
NN ~ w ui e r m m N a in ~u n o n a
ri H H H H H H H rl H N N N N N N
44
° rHl b 1.) 1) J0.' b 1) °
L) l.) N L J-)
b ro al U ro L ro Ia H 44 Ol ro U
C H H W N N A E N i 00 .G ro N
m .u U) X J) O E 3 H -ri i.) w A JJ
X ro .a a ra X i y C U )-I .U U U
3 .C o a .q ro m. •ri (a A w b G C O rJ O Q) (a
v ro u> w O a A a U A O a) o v a) b A a
E N A •n a t) C N .C w y 3 E
O X O C ro b a) G C C 3 w H 0 •rl
N 0 'd ro al N ,S.' 'O a) N 0 ro O a) H L JJ
O U -r•I 1.) N L H Fi E -11 3 •11 O m ro b 3
E O 0 0 -H a a) O 1) a) a) C a) O
a) u N a) H 3 O 4.j A F u q U > N ro L N O
A H a) b) U ro JJ m 0 a) U) (1) •ri N ro
Ai U) O b y N b N )d G Y) N E a) A
C •ri -ri H O 0 ro X .C C •ri •ri ro a) F4 N
a) X H N H H U 3 1) b 'b 10 1) H U > 'a
> O O 000 C O -H ro U a ra o N
O O) a O N ro O w 3 3 >7 m A v ro E C N m A
U) a U G 0 -ri b G J) 11 a) O -ri O H
E H -ri N O •H as N O O b a)
3 H H A A 3 m C .u 04 N O U E a) w H N C
b 0 0 -ri a) X O a) A G H t) U •n U U
G ro N U E > m C u m. •ri a v a
ro N X .7 C w ro y a W a O b
x 3 o ra ro N x 3 v o
u b Ot 3 ro E y W q 0 M
rLa O A A O a) n- li
ro C C O H N W H }i O 3 u m W H C
ro A al A H O 3 H U) W G A X N y W ro L N
O y a al 41 W G •r) A A ro al -ri ~G A U 3: ri b Yr
a m SUi b e 3 b
b E w w O G W O H O 0 N A H E 3 -A A N C v H A
w o q u ro x a m w a) ro N C
E E N u u U a y O a) a A M •rl a a) N m
m b 1] x H W •ri -H a) a 43 U qQ H G N A A H Q
a) 4,
N O A m }
aAi ° N N ~ m m U O >4 N H 0 A A Pi P tn
m ro w 3 A H H [ ro '>y H O N m O U G ro H H a - m
r, b C O £ m a) a C m : D E JJ ro m H E U) H
N O 'U a) co 'U N m 0 m SS A a) co a) -H F'+
H A H A. E Ri H 0 H >r W )d ~H 0) •ri U
Q) L .u G O H £ O )-I O O G N U al 3
O E b •ri O U r~ £ £ A E -H N £ N O
y 0 C N b x O O C O y w to w O L ro 'O
m - ro .C a) O U U U) 3 -ri U ti a) U O a) O U m b
dt U) > L C 3 3 O H - fa A ra a) A
G•+ w X a O H •ri 10 O N AJ w 1) N a) N N
-ri H H O H y O G b a) L }i N b H Q)
O a A W mw U) ro b H •ri •ri H G A m
m .A U C a) A )i H W H H ro a) L) b
N O A a) - N 0) )-i ro A A q
N a N G N N ,4 X
H G sa 10 b ro - N t) yl ri
3 H w N C 7 ro O N U -
U O A } N Q) O a) a A -ri 0 a) O A A .G G 9
G
3 A t) a) E CL A 3 A .U b a A y t) L •rf u -ri
rt N m a in ~ r m m o ri N ~ a u) ~n r m ~ o ri N m w N
N H .i H .i H ri .i N N N ry N
0
m
\ at
N N
Z )%r
O L
H m
m
m N
H a)
O U
H N
~a
w
E
m v
H
C)
O
O
n
N
0
N
\
cc)
N a)
O y
H m
m
CO )i
H a)
li
N
O V
07-z
H rn
a
E
co a)
H
c~
O
a
ro
rn
0
$
N
m
•rl
W
H
n•
O
JJ
b
O
C.
M
m
C
-
nj .
J.J
X
0
a)
4
A
E
E
C
0
O
y
-ri
aJ
la
U
U
a)
3
0
rd
O
b
Cn
7
C
aJ
ro
C
G
A
sa
iJ
JJ
A
v
ro
m
ro
aJ
b
FC
o
a
0
U)
iJ
.C
H
iJ
E
E
C
O
0
O
b
C
J,
a)
ro
4
m
0
H
G
a
C
C
U
A
O
0 O
1
y
G
-0
ro
n.
0
G.
iJ
L
W
w
m
(a
r.
10
4
L
E
0
a
0
a
0
C
0
a)
H
n7
G
v
of
m
m
x
0
A
0
0 O
m
v
a
3
v
C
A
H
'O
L
JJ
0
O
U
U
L
L
~
U
~
C
H
~
ro
~
ro
m
0
J:
b
C
q
C
0
O
to
O
5
v
ro
Jj
G
-H
k
o
v
G
0
U
ro
rn
3
J,
v
x
G
o
JJ
Jj
v
3
C
G
al -
O
A
W
3
G
a)
b
W
a
O
O
n•
O
O
a)
La
C
O
0
0
C
W
m
0
?
3
m
m
H
3
U
J-)
O
H
10
la
N
0
U'
G
w
G
ro
Jj
Jj
H.
a)
o
3
U
-H
w
3
N
H
f0
m
C,"
G
N
H
4
J..1
a
W
.C
X
0
JJ
O
J
m
m
0
C
ca
C
m
O
O
ro
dt
G
m
r
-H
♦J
O
m
H
-
) .
U)
C
U
A
C
-11
m
G
W
G
,G
L
U
U)
A
(Z
C
Z~
FC
O
o
rt
F
z~
r
j
m
13
4
~
z
m
a)
rt
ro
~
zC
rJ;
U)
,04
a
W
ro
N
$t
r
~
H
z
z
•
i
•
i
(
Ea
2
U
H
z
11
0a
z
4J
d
W
[
H~
H
ro
.u
H
r
r
W
H
-r1
Jj
H
F'..
H
2
W
x
N
a
E
G '
W
x
A
U
a)
a
O
a
W
x
G
a
W
x
a
O<
♦J
+
W
x
H
W
x
O<
U
a)
P4
U
O
a
R'.
U
P4
U
ro
0
w4
3
u
a
U
G
k4
H
b)
ro
W
H
1J
m
W
C
H
C
W
H
A
W
H
W
H
O
W
U
A
z
U
2
ro
u
ro
z
u
3
r
Zi
JJ
U
z
U
•r1
z
U
ro
U
O
U
m
0
H
0
H
O
U
O
.
O
C
-
U
O
U
0
O
H
H
H
(d
-H
a
H
a
H
H
3
-H
H
al
H
H
H
O
H
£
C
to
Cl)
£
.G
0)
m
£
m
£
O
aJ
m
£
m
£
E
m
O
G
m
co
H
H
m
C
O
m
m
m
m
a'
•H
10
H
x
(1,
JJ
H
ro
04
ro
14
H
ai
H
X
E'.
H
-ri
a'
H
E
pi
JJ
H
o
o
u
rn
J
o
G
m
G
o
~
H
0~
o
o
m
o
x
u
o
u
U
o
o
U
U
C
rt)
u
v
U
a)
u
U
aJ
U
v
u
u
U
U
N
u
o
U
U
C
u
o
>
0)
m
0
0
ro
+
m
d
ro
G
o
7
aJ
m
m
A
J:
a
iJ
a
U
L
W
E
U
li
k
N
G
7
U
U
•r1
U
0
L
i
N
QI
a)
a)
H
m
y
JJ
ro
U
n•
rd
H
H
H
C
J'.
O
-H
•rl
-ri
.G
(1)
J-)
J7
O
O
N
r.G
G
m
a
•tl
3
3
JJ
m
•r,
J.)
a
u
ri
N
m
c
in
io
r
m
m
o
H
,-i .
ri
N
H
m
H
~
~n
r1
~o
H
t~
H
m
H
m
rl
o
N
H
N
N
N
m
N
a
N
of
N
al
G
Ji
S
41
rt
o
m
u
C
b
U)
N
0
b
J
u
0
to
b
a)
W
N
G
C
W
,0
i
1
ro
H
C
U
3
3
A
N
44
4
m
1J
m
U)
a)
(1)
of
(1)
JJ
•O
iJ
X
xJ
O
a
}
b
U
U
w
ED
.,i
7
m
iJ
lii
o
k
3
E
Qi
w
W
o
~
m
f
~
W
•r)
ro
AJ
H
W
ro
X
b
a)
J
J
~
r
-I
m
0
ro
U
)
1
A
a)
0
ul
aJ
£
.
C
q
-U
0
o$
m
r
A
N
E
x
10
O
u
JJ
)-I
W
O
-H
H
ro
>
m
m
m
W
.
G
.C
U
3J
U
-rf
tJ
H
(U
A
u
G
a
+
a)
ro
b
m
ro
JJ
F
r
n1
m
a
m
~n
r
yi 0 0
0 a) U) H
0 b u m x A u
m J C L ni n3
u m. m } 3 o u
G LJ 0 A 0 H O (D w O G
Li •r{ aJ 3 3 0 W JJ (L) E . 0)
H 3 ro U m a) O ii m O •H
3 m - a) w E to W m O G y aa))
W U C b 9 . •ri O C J H X L) 7 •ri ,ry
U U U 0 N 14 3
G (d f., a) •ri q m O - E m
ro E O iJ a aJ a, to ro 3 0 0)
O a a)i m m ~ b 0 (11 4 '0 0 H 101 N
0 m a x G o v m 0 CJ)
O U ~ L0-' E ro U o 40.7 E >1 o
O H
U G 3 41 G
~J )a 7 m .i m b b
(1) 0 M d)
•°C •m JJ E bJ 0 J, 'A
r-C a FC O 0 O E V 0 ~ .ro+'. a FC G
Z O Z 41 3 U 3 a) .u O z
RC ro
H P4 RC rt •o > 4) (U D4
4 Cl aJJ N co
W m m v 1J x a w W u ° u
a. ° w m S A ro m U
CL' LW~Ya. WWa P •r1 ~l H 4.' O >1 ~,a~.a7 W~aa
z 2 2 Ia a) N 0 A a4') 2 G 2 U C
O ?i O O •0 a) 3 m .C ',J• O a) O G JJ
H U H H a) (1) 3 - •r) a, 3 a) f-r E H b ro
m m m m 7 li .o :ms O a) m m O m a) J
Cn H m 0 CO to b tJ 0 G A C m m m N JJ
H O H H ,G I-I G r~+ G fa H H O~r £ a O W ro m H al N J U O O O
O C O C O •O m M o O 0>1
U ro u ro u X JJ a) JJ H U " U b
H H H 0 G w m C 0 m -1 W a)
a a A E L 0 i ) N'0 3 an b)
H H la w a) A C G v •r)
rd N U m li `d b U G ,J ro -ri m m
4 }-I 0) -H G -rt m m „ U C (1)
G' G 3 ro C W 0 n A b U
m v O .J; 0 m O a) 7 w Cu m
C7 C7 x L li 7 U A 3 H U)
m m o H N m a m ~n n m m o H N m a )n
ri N H r-I ri ri rl H H ri N N N N N N
O
N
N Q)
0
O U
H m
m
m )-I
H a)
m
O U
H l
a
E
m Q)
H
U
0
a
N
H
M
0
0
m
N m
ro
O .0
H Cl)
M
CO 14
H (L)
E .j
O a)
O V.
z~
z~Hjj Lf1
H ~
P4
m aE
F0.' H
C7
m
O
a
w
C
u
o
N
o
X
°
O
S+
y
u
G
u
3
>
m
m
-d
C
ro
L
C
-.1
O
r+
A
L
w
d)
H
y
N
'
d
4
0
0
-
a1
U
Ol
H
-
H
,C
N
v
-.i
H
~
m
m
G
0
0
a
3 L
3
A
m
3
3
G
o
O
U
ri
+
v
A
rn
a
o
N
a
+
a
u
ro
a
G
o
L
m
m
a
ro
E
b
N
0 O
ro
u
^
m
o
m
v
v
-
v
w
o
(a
ro
a)
ro
G
.G
3
.G
H
.C
H
G
W
m
y
N
v
v
O
u
m
m
?
m
0
O
H
U
.C
L
U
a
•
N
~
fi
m
G
n.
-1
tT
X
7
E E
(1)
N
.C
W
E
U
L
G
G
m
0
7.
E
w
a!
o
al
-.a
•1
co
O
'd
m
,C
v
ro
O
(u
H
H
3
G
m
G
ro
:1 0
m
b
0 O
A
E
U
H
C
ro
L
N
C
sa
ro
O
u
m
v
m
d)
a)
O
O
v
m
y
m m
b
O
.G
0
Ol
.G
7
ro
yl
tJ
.C
U
m
w
v
271
G
m
w
m
L
O
C
JJ
m
v
A
v
m
O
0
a)
ro
b
H
7
m
tr
n•
X
b
v
A
b
>
U
M
O
2T
G
-.a
G
v
C
b
H
G
A
°
ro
A
C
H
G
C
7
0
a)
3
m
•
Id
o O
ro
j.
O
ro
j
o
ro
E
ED
H
a
o
a
v
v
v
C
x
0 o
m
5
v
o
L
v
a
a
si
v
v
3
0
o
ro
H
E
U
U
U
,G
.U
C
-0
C
m
o
o
ro
a)
44
L
-H
a)
v
ai
m
b
m
o
m
m
G
0
o
v
ro
0 o
w
ro
a
0
rn
.U
,7.
v
Si
ro
O
A
w
O
a
o
O
ry'
E
E
-H
W
,
W
,G
0
W
3
0
•ri
H
0
E
m
ro
m
G.,
0
x
U
O
x
ro
a
u
a
O
G
m
O
A
K
a)
a)
U
U
ri
u
A
u
H
G
v
o
m
a
>
rn
u
v
ro
b
H
N
FC
H
U
H
ro
N.
a)
E
0
W
O
U
U
U
3
U
.G
m
u
m
m
O
li
v
a)
U
H
U
U
U
1)
(d
v
41
a)
)-I
m
O
3
A
H
m
m
H
W
H
A
X
U
L
4
a'
•d
U
!J
W
v
E-
E
U
a
L
N
m
i)
v
v
a
H
rd
0
0
O
n.
H
C
Si
a
a
>
rx
a
m
A
G
W.
O
b
G
1)
Z
0
a)
m
o
H
m
H
al
a)
,d
(U
X
0
O
O
>
m
m
m
N
a)
u
v
a)
G
a
iJ
U
o
o
u
w
rn
w
G
E
o
U
>
U
li
U
W
a)
O
m
ro
1)
3
m
CC
i)
a)
m
i)
m
1]
co
H
a)
A
j
v
d
x
U
H
b
)1
m
m
a
>
m
,
G
G
(d
0r
u
r
er
ro
G
,c -
m
y
o
dl
)i
m
y
(Ij
A
c
ro
m
,d
m
v
v
ro
to
a)
a)
H
U)
3
v
.G
O
o
W
ro
N
u
0
U7
0
.l.)
S,
a)
m
r-I
N
bl
bl.
G
1)
w
•~I
v
ro
v
a
a
rn
G
+
v
ro
m
v
G
v
c
v
c
a
a
)i
w
o
G
y
j
ro
G
El
1-I
U
l~
m
m
m
A
y
O
W
ro
m
H
ro
U
m
H
N
n
V
of
~e
r
m
a~
H
H
rl
N
H
H
d,
H
of
H
.i
N
N
'I
N
N
N
N
~P
N
ut
N
j.,
W
G
m
C
C
i
3
m
a)
?
G
o
°
v
0
y
.
r.
0
a
O
ri
r
,i
v
m
rn
m
a
+
x
rn
a
E
y
3
G
a)
N
a)
ri
a)
b
m
b
N
-0
b
O
m
ro
m
1J
b
)J
ro
a)
41
G
N
N
y
A
O
x
ri
C
0
0
P4
m
-A,
°
H
)
W
G
U
G'.
E
m
r
I
C7
ro
m
3
m
'0
m
a]
C7
m
~
i
f
q
0
G
°
01
°
0
"i
o
a)
a)
+
v
o
q
rn
ro
u
07
1)
y
i)
Y)
AJ
of
v .
H
4
O
(a
m
H
41
ro
y
41
C
>
v
a
O
m
w
y
ri
y
m
y
O
G
b1
ro
A
gg
°
-H
:j
li
0
m
3
0
X
a)
(1).
H
>
O
. 3
E
S
w
H
0
>4
E
L)
J 3
Ol
v
G
a)
)-I
H
v
H
m
°
r-I
m
%
!J
U
m
N
v
-I
W
W
m
4
t
0
ro
C
E
ro
Dk
r.C
C
H
a
. .C
%
d
G
U
(1)
O
0
O
O
O
O
ro
A
W
a)
y
N
Q)
U1
W
U
W
O
W
X
0
E
W
'q
,C
G
m
H
X
m
m
co
O
U
0
w
7.
G
U
W
04
•.i
4J
H
~
4
Q)
n
0
a
H
°
E.
H
W
~
C
m
x
o
m
'N
En
t4
U
.4^
u
y
a
x
a
v
x
u
a
u
10
H
3
1,
G
W
W
O
E
W
H
W
H
G
v
'O
U
H
d)
O
2
Z
O
z
U
Z
u
-.i
a)
U
FI
L1
O
O
>
U
O
U
O
U
w
m
L
H
O
G
H
H
E
H
H
H
H
,G
a
v
+-1
E
m
v)
JJ
m
U)
Z
E
41
a
J-!
ro
W
O
H
J-)
H
-,I
H
(L•
H
~
H
H
:1
44
IV
r
~
O
~
~
~
~C
x
L
C
O
O
x
3
O
x
li
N
m
u
C
o
U
U
N
3
u
U
U
U
m
H
ro
r-I
0
b
C
G
m
a)
oo
E
H
C
U
L
O
G
v
U
ro
-'I
L
•O
m
01
O
v
m
v
.W
b
m
m
E
(a
U
m
li
C
E
-H
O
ro
H
y
b
0
d
-ri
0
o
v
i
G
tr
m
A
.i
O
P
N
q
N
to
°
N
a
u
w
E
a
)
0
m
Pa
H
0.
•.1
m
H
w
A
m
E
ri
N
m
. a
,n
~n
r
m
m
.•i
N
m
a
,n
r
m
n•
1.)
m
to
al
m
1-4
m
m
m
3
O
E
3
0
m
(t
G
O
a
1
E
S+
b
,a
m
H
44
w
4
-ri
G
H
L
G
0
i
H
H
O
A
H
N
G
p
A
0
m
C
,k
1.)
U
M
O
(Z
G
a)
O
-ri
A
v
1)
3
-H
Aj
41
E
G
G
Id
G
C
3
G
~J
44
O
W
a
i
C
H
ro
G
H
ro
v
m
[
m
N
m
U
(L)
J
a
Si
3
0)
3
U
CU
H
-1
9
E
41
ro
H
a)
L
ro
A
0
3
m
v
w
a
'
s,
(d
4.)
O
G
rd
w
14
a)
m
O
C
3
0
b
i
y
H
v
U
m
0
E
A
3
0
)
a
ri
o
N
N
N
m
N
a u)
N N
0
N
co
co
N
m
W
N m
m
m to
H a)
u
m
O U
z~
H ~n
a
a xt
a
E
m a)
H
C7
0
a
m
M
0
m
L
N N
v
O u
H CD
H U
Em
00
z~
H V1
0
a
M v
E~ H
C7
m
O
a
C
C
Q)
x
n
H
ro
U
?
v
O
A-1
ro
ro
ro
u
m
C
m
H
G
A
O
C
N
O
L
1J
-
i
N
.C
H
.
i
>1
O
E
m
r'
U
v
O
u
1+)
w
v
7i
L
O
G
(a
7
m
A
w
j,
O
N
ro
G
C
C
N
b
G
u
-1
m
3
O
>1
E
m
Q)
H
m
C
m
X
In
L
O
G
O
u
m
G
7
H
„
a)
01
O
O
o
C
U
O
O
rj
O
H
O
C
C
H
C
A
i
rJ
w
m
-rt
m
H
v
-ri
m
x
ro
0
v
ro
ro
m
ro
-H
o
a)
-r,
a
E
1)
v
q
w
ro
ro
41
o
H
0
U
a
•ri
O
H
'0
Fi
-H
H
V)
G
m
-H
G
•rl
N
E
v
r•C
E
O
X.
v
1
0
Ot
C
O
0
A
\
O
'U
>
ro
y
JJ
,G
M
JJ
C
w
H
11
-ri
U
-rl
N
L
H
a)
N
m
.C
H
-H
rd
ro
IH
0
H
it
N
G
•ri
ro
v
v
U
0
Ul
u
ro
v
m
-r1
\ 1J
N (U
m
A
C
y
a)
a)
v
ro
ro
O
C
A
C
U
3
>
ro
0
G
X
41
-1
-,1
L
O
-rt
z H
a)
O
-H
A
ro
4
ro
A
m
-r1
a~
w
u
H
O L1
C
rt
v
L
E
v
16
O
t
a
ro
Ol
H
m
i
-
v
H
O
H
A
C
E
O
a)
x
a
.C
C
m
H
3
1J
H
H
17
}1
0
,2.
r-I
>
O
A,'
L
-rl
m H
0
(1)
04
Id
Id
O
x
m
ro
H
-
L
O
U
A
v
m
O
-r1
ro
v
C
3
A
N
..i
m
.O
G
ro
m
ii
E
x
-H
a
.i
'O
~l
G
W
co
X
W
m
7
W
-rl
O
ro
O (1)
o
i
H
ij
a
ro
G
a
i
a
.H
>
(d
a
m
o
a
m
x
u
E
C
O
W
C
O
W
M
O
U
m
E
O
A
O
.u
N
U
H
'S
m
C
G
zz
R
a
u
a)
O)
C
W
m
a)
X
W
m
X
m
L
W
m
ro
b
C7
O
O
U
C
b
L•i
•
H
)-I
v
O
A
C
-r~
m
O
Ca
r-
W
~
ro
ro
O
O
m
W
H
G
U
W
N
C
M
H
W
b
N
m
z w
H lfl
?
U
i
.
Ot
Ir
v
~
W
O
C
W
O
W
F
v
W
C
F
E
F
H
m
E
w
v
x
ai
0
x
x
ro
x
-r
C
G
~t
b
H
u
1•4
a
-rl
U
a
U
a
ro
U
O
a
H
a
.L
O
ro
d
h'
C
H
W
u
H
W
H
W.
E
H
bl
W
A,'
3
W
U
U
C
E
a
ro
y
0
u
U
ro
z
o
0
E
u
u
z
o
u
u
z
0
m
r
u
v
z
o
a
v
o
ro
z
o
v
L
ro
d
m y
o 41
H
3
a)
H
X
H
H
q
j
£
U)
H
~
m
c)
a
i
EE-
N
4
c
n
a
,
i
~
o
-m
C
a
Ea
m
m
H
o
-
l
a
m
H
a
m
H
~L
q
a
o
mi
>
>
N
CO)
sUi
N
A
O
9
y-~
r
3'
o
o
4
0
"
0
>
~
cri
u
u
V
-1
4
~
v
a)
o
u
a)
u
H
u
u
u
u
r
r
U
G
ro
u
G
'd
o
Id
r=
A
7
n.
H
G
O
n•
.,y
8
v
G
ri
0
a.1
O
-•i
ro
-A
U
L
m
b
44
~
G
ro
.u
m
m
0
O
0
co
C
a)
C
E
U
O
L
m
>
•r
1
N
X
m
•
i
ED
d
x
>
"
.C
U
v
R1
U
•
-I
•i
-I
H
ro
o
v
ro
rn
4
a
v
a
❑
o
o
4
a
C
S4
H
E
ro
L
ro
C
ro
A
E
i
3
.i
N
m
a
u1
1o
r
m
m
o
ri
N
m
a
m
in
n
m
m
o
.i
N
m
w v1
N
rl
H
N
H
N
ri
rl
H
H
N
N
N
N
N N
0)
ul
n
rd
O
C
m
N
C
m
bl
11
L
N
3
a)
d
-H
>
M
44
O
b
E
C
ta
raa
to
O
m
.C
ol
G
v
A
ri
r-1
m
m
u
v
v
v
a
O
N
ro
J
a
1
0
m
m
H
v
U
•,1
m
a
s
a.1
•ri
u
-H
C
A
A
O
v
v
A
H
A
H
O
0
3
O
5
H
U
a.1
v
a
v
i
m
m
C
E
v
N
11
x
U
O
a
;3:
C
(L)
N
H
m
1
m
iJ
O
Cl
O
m
4-1
to
z
'
S•.
O
E
a
-H
7
m
C
•H
li
ro
G
(a
0
m
H
O
q
C
C
O
Jq
U
o
(d
H
a)
11
>
0
•ri
ro
m
r=
1)
X
H
4-1
C
H
A
v
G
o
H
Si
-A
i;
-
U
0
•rl
41
O
ro
O
N
L
1)
O
H
co
m
a3
-rl
H
H
ro
E
>1
w
ro
H
-.i
\
(a
r
O
y
O
m
y
.C
X
A
v
G
w
O
m
,G
•.i
a)
N
O
C
L
O
O
>
m
X
.G
0
\
a.1
O
ti
E)
a)
0
w
a)
O
a)
ro
N
N
v-i
E
N W
a
E
v
M
0
b
ro
O
O
bi
r.
-H
n.
H
E
m
4
_ii
Ol
r
1
3
H
i
z S
G
m
•r1
A
H
G
ro
o
-ri
(v
o
0
z
o
v
o Y1
r
r
o
1
o
u
m
H
a
+1
-ri
v
o
Y)
m
q
H m
ro
.G
U)
v
rl
o
H
>
0
a
L
ro
~
m
ro
li
E
a)
v
m
m
ul
Cn
o
0
m H
E
O
E
m
J.)
.u
o
o
N
•ri
o
~j
U)
G
G
PI
q
H
v
£
m
ro
H
ro
v
co
7
tr'
C
•
t
H
7
v
U
m
E
4)
H
H
G
O
- i
O
C r o
•ri
cl.
£ m
O
ro
3
o
m
7
Id
m
~:j
U
m
r
ro
u
u
>
m
J
1
L
3
a)
w
:
o
ro
m
-H
44
O)
A
ro
a3
x
v
Si
a)
a
C)
u
•ri
C
X
H
m
.C
_
v
a
v
,a
m
E
U
•rl
z
FC
rd
E
v
c7
H
ro
0
H
W
v
m
r
a
x
H
A
0
H
H
F
z w
C
01
•ri
>
v
ri
„
q
O
a
m
3
G
3
a)
a
z
m
H ~n
o
ro
a)
C
ro
3
0
>
O
m
a
H
m
H
w
Ol
E
u
w
H
E
0
ro
w
o
G
H
F
w
a
ro
x
u
m
m
G
-H
H
x
U
;:j
O
o
m
ro
ro
x
u
H
ro
s
H
v
m
v
C
0
x
u
a)
.G
W
>•i
co
U
a
04
c
u
~
a
0
'A
3
u
"
0
W
L)
v
U
0
3:
u
z
o
3
-i
m N
E
4
0
C]
m
.
~
E
O
H
3
v
H
i
x
.u
H
G
X
m
E
ro
U
ro
x
x
m
ro
m
G
ro
m
m
x
r-i
m
O
C7
P4
ro
•r1
a
G
m
G
m
a
ro
a)
-H
v
u
-ri
a
0
H
m
m
~
g
)
o
3
a
v-1
~
U
M
~
c
ro
ro
w
~
y
v
m
U
v
m
C
N
C
O
u
J.1
.G
ii
H
a)
H
E
-rt
.C
ro
C
C
X
ro
C
m
ro
.N
w
O
N
L
m
-
E
•rl
•rl
U
O)
LW
O
O
w
>
v
m
G
C
al
C
-rI
H
a
04
H
m
11
m
H
m
a
a-+
a
O
L
O
,
m
v
Pi
m
m
3
-•i
m
v
•rl
O
7
o
N
o
>
•ri
(D
m
'o
r
I
u
„
E
o
a)
ro
Ir
u
G
G
v
x
x
o
>
U
10
Si
O1
H
J
•.i
16
m
ro
41
v
E
ro
.i
N
m
a
u1
~n
r
m
m
r♦
r♦
N
ri
rl
c
rl
r1
N
rl
rl
.i
N
H
N
N
N
a 1n
N N N
~
q
a)
v
01
0
q
O
N
u
0
a]
tJ
E
0
U
O
0
•H
nl
4-4
a)
-H
44
b
0
.4'
N
W
O
y
H
O
U
U
ri
a)
al
a)
L
ri
U
U
0
:j
r
U
0
al
W
N
U
G
N
H
O
1'~
a]
s
X.
U
H
O
H
al
O
bl
u
.q
O
o
•.a
a)
U
.U
U
m
b
a~
m
b
ro
ro
O
O
0
H
W
P
iJ
E
0
a
w
a
ro
v
b
a
q
O1
H
L
~i
a]
•rl
-.-1
N
a1
tJ
ai
£
O
H
m
a)
r
ro
rl
-H
M
04
r
~
O
0
U
;
r
k
rt
N
W
O
N
a
A
k
y
O
ro
ro
W
U
b
O
.a
ro
ro
ro
N
U
s
ro
6
v
m
ro
r-i.
a
w
u
~
1-1
m
0
w°
co
rl
N
NI
W
I!1
b
F
m
A O
N
H
rl
N
rl
M
rl
T
rl
I!1
rl
b
N
F
.i
m
rl
ri
O N
N N
N
N
tl T N
N N N
n
ri
l0
0
0
N
cc)
\ 1.1
N Ol
al
O y
H m
U] 34
H
aJ
£
£ ro
O U
z~
H Ifl
a
W
E .
FC ~
Cl)
O
a
Date: February 2, 2006
For Agenda Of:_ _February 8, 2006
Agenda Item: 4
REPORT TO: The Planning Commission
FROM: The Development Review Committee .
LOCATION: 54 Chester Street
Architecture and Site Application 5-05-031
Requesting approval to demolish a pre-1941 residence, construct a
new single family residence and accessory structure with reduced
setbacks and request for an interpretation of the cellar policy on
property zoned R-1D. APN: 529-08-008
PROPERTY OWNER: Anna Huynh and Kevin Crane
DEEMED COMPLETE: January 20, 2006
FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION: July 20, 2006
FINDINGS AND
CONSIDERATIONS: - As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for
Architecture and Site applications.
■ As required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code for the
demolition of a single family. residence
■ The application is Categorically Exempt from CEQA, Section
15303.
ACTION: The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed
within ten days.
EXHIBITS: A.
Required Findings and Considerations (1 page)
B.
Recommended Conditions of Approval (1 page)
C.
Letter of Justification and project description received January 20,
2006 (2 pages)
D.
Project Data Sheet
E.
Design review comments dated April 20, 2005 (1 page)
F.
Arbor Report dated November 26, 2005 (6 pages)
G.
Town's Cellar Policy (2 pages)
H.
Planning Commission Interpretation of Cellar Policy
I.
Development Plans dated December 1, 2005 (11 pages)
A. DISCUSSION:
1. Project Description
The applicant is requesting approval to demolish a pre-1941 residence, construct a new
single family residence and accessory structure and is requesting an interpretation of the
cellar policy. The applicant's letter of justification (Exhibit C) and development plans
Attachment 6
The Planning Commission - Page 2
54 Chester St./5-05-031
February 8, 2006
(Exhibit I) are attached. The existing one story, 1,310 square foot residence is located at
54 Chester St. on a 5,500 square foot lot. The proposed two story Craftsman style home
is 1,903 square feet with a 252 square foot detached garage and a 1,726 square foot
.cellar.
2. Neighborhood Compatibility and Design
The Town's consulting architect reviewed the project and concluded that the design is
good and provided two suggestions (Exhibit D). The first is to consider wood caps and
bases at the front porch columns, which the applicant incorporated in the design. The
second suggestion is to add divided lights to the double hung windows, which the
applicant declined. The Town's consulting architect noted that the two suggestions
would enhance the design, but were not absolutely essential to a good design.
Chester Street is comprised of one-and two story homes with a variety of architectural
styles. The proposed house size and floor area ratio (FAR) is compatible with the other
homes in the area. Table 1 shows the house size, FAR and lot size of the neighboring
properties.
H
ouse Sires C.om triSOn;for.54 C
heA& Street
APN
Address
House Size
Lot Size
FAR
529-08-004
46 Chester St.
1,039
5,500
.19
529-08-005
48 Chester St.
936
5,500
.17
529-08-006
50 Chester St.
1,397
5,500
.25
529-08-007
52 Chester St.
1,753
5,500
.32
529-08-009
56 Chester St.
1,882
5,500
.34
529-08-010
58 Chester St.
1,925
5,500
35
529-08-011
62 Chester St.
1,921
5,500
.35
529-08-012
64 Chester St.
1,966
5,500
.36
'529-06-059
41 Chester St.
1,768
4,514
.39
529-06-058
46 Chester St.
1,319
.600
.22
529-06-057
47 Chester St.
1,991
5,800.
.34
529-06-056
49 Chester St.
1,280
5,600
.23
529-06-044
497 Bird Ave.
3,238
10,890
.30 .
529-06-043
59 Chester St.
1,739
5,940
.29
529-06-019
499 Wright St.
1,816
7,040
.26
Average
1,731
.29
529-08-008
(proposed project)
54 Chester St.
*1,903 sq. ft.
5,500
.35
2Square footage of propose home if the project is approved with entireIlgr
µ _ -
not counted in the s uare oota e o house.
`
The Planning Commission - Page 3
54 Chester StJS-05-031
February 8, 2006
3. Historic Preservation Committee (HPC)
On March 2, 2005 the HPC reviewed the demolition of the existing pre-1941 home and
recommended approval based on the following findings:
A. Based on the evidence provided by the structural engineer, the structure has
inadequate structural integrity.
B. Modifications have been made to the residence which has resulted in the loss of its
historic character.
C. The structure is not associated with any events that have made a significant
contribution to the Town.
D. No significant persons are associated with the site.
E. There are no distinctive characteristics of type, period or method of construction or
representation of work of a master.
F. Does not yield information important to the Town's history.
4. Arborist Review
The Town's consulting arborist reviewed the project's potential tree impacts (Exhibit E).
Five trees protected by the Tree Protection Ordinance are in direct conflict with the
proposed home. The Town's consulting arborist finds the removal of these trees in
compliance with the Town's Ordinance. The Town's consulting arborist concludes that
removal of the trees will not have significant aesthetic impact on the property due to the
small size of the trees, species, and low monetary value. Three replacement trees are
recommended for the loss of the five trees. The replacement trees and all other
recommendations to protect existing trees are included in the recommended conditions of
approval for the proposed project.
5. Cellar Policy InteMretation
Proposed Cellar
The total square footage of the cellar is 1,726 square feet. 1,411 square feet of the cellar
is beneath the footprint of the home and 315 square feet of the cellar is beneath the
attached deck located at the rear of the home.
Staff's Interpretation
The Town's cellar policy states that cellars and basements (except light and exit wells)
shall not extend beyond the building footprint. Please see the Town's Cellar Policy
(Exhibit F) and Planning Commission's interpretation of the Cellar Policy (Exhibit H).
Historically, staff has not considered unenclosed decks to be part of the building
footprint. Therefore, 315 square feet of the cellar that is located under the deck is
counted toward the square footage of the house. The proposed home is 1,903 square feet,
which is also the maximum allowed square footage for the site. If the 315 square foot
portion of the cellar is counted toward the house, the applicant would be requesting a
home over the maximum square footage allowed by Town Code.
The Planning Commission - Page 4
54 Chester St./S-05-031
February 8, 2006 .
Applicant's request
The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission make an interpretation that the
attached deck is part of the building footprint. Such an interpretation would allow the
315 square foot area of the cellar to not count against the floor area of the home. The
applicant points out that the Town's Cellar Policy allows a cellar to be located
underneath the building footprint which includes the garage. The applicant believes that
an attached deck should be considered part of the building footprint like an attached
garage because the attached deck has the same impact as an attached garage. Further, the
applicant states that the proposed cellar,.will not be visible to the neighbors and does not
change the look of the house.
B. CONCLUSION:
The cellar issue withstanding, staff has concluded that the home is well designed and is
compatible with the neighborhood. The applicant is requesting approval of the project with
an interpretation of the cellar policy that considers an attached deck part of the building
footprint. Historically., staff has not considered a deck to be part of the building footprint.
The Commission should discuss the following key issues:
• Interpretation of building footprint as it relates to attached decks
• Consider if attached decks should be treated similarly to attached garages
Staff finds, in this case, the cellar under the deck will not increase the mass of the proposed
home and will not be visible to neighbors. In addition, the under-deck portion of the cellar
(315 sq. ft,) is smaller than the cellar area that is permitted under a typical attached two-car
garage (440 sq. ft.).
C. RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission should discuss the key issues and take action on the proposed
project. If appropriate, the Commission should provide direction for the cellars located
beneath attached decks.
If the Planning Commission is satisfied with the current proposal, it should make the
following findings and considerations:
1. Make the required findings and considerations (Exhibit A); and
2. Approve the Architecture and Site application subject to the recommended conditions of
approval (Exhibit B).
The Planning Commission - Page 5
54 Chester St./5-05-031
February 8, 2006
If the Planning Commission is not satisfied with the proposed application, it should do one
of the following:
1. Approve the-proposed application with additional conditions; or
2. Refer the application back to staff for further work as directed; or
3. Deny the application.
Bud N. Lortz, Director of Community Development
Prepared by: Judie Gilli, Assistant Planner
BNL:RT:jg:mdc
cc: Kevin Crane and Anna Huynh, 54 Chester Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032
N:1DEV\REPORTS\2006L54Chesterrev l .wpd
54 Chester Street
REQUIRED FINDINGS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR
54 Chester Street
Architecture and Site Application S-05-031
Requesting approval to demolish a pre-1941 residence, construct a new single family residence
and accessory structure with reduced setbacks and request for and interpretation of the cellar
policy on property zoned R-1D. APN: 529-08-008
PROPERTY OWNER: Anna Huynh and Kevin Crane
FINDINGS
■ The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303 of the State
Environmental Guidelines as adopted by the Town.
CONSIDERATIONS
■ As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for Architecture and Site
applications:
The deciding body shall consider all relevant matter including, but not limited to, the
following:
(1) Considerations relating to traffic safety and traffic congestion. The effect of the site
development plan on traffic conditions on abutting streets; the layout of the site with
respect to locations and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian entrances, exits,
drives, and walkways; the adequacy of off-street parking facilities to prevent traffic
congestion; the location, arrangement, and dimension oftruck loading and unloading
facilities; the circulation pattern within the boundaries of the development, and the
surfacing, lighting and handicapped accessibility of off-street parking facilities.
A. Any project or development that will add traffic to roadways and critical
intersections shall be analyzed, and a determination made on the following
matters:
1. The ability of critical roadways and major intersections to
accommodate existing traffic;
2. Increased traffic estimated for approved developments not yet
occupied; and
3. Regional traffic growth and traffic anticipated for the proposed
project one (1) year after occupancy.
Exhibit A'
B. The deciding body shall review the application for traffic
roadway/intersection capacity and make one (1) of the following
determinations:
1. The project will not impact any roadways and/or intersections causing
the roadways and/or intersections to exceed their available capacities.
2. The project will impact a roadway(s) and/or intersection(s) causing
the roadway(s) and/or intersection(s) to exceed their available
capacities.
Any project receiving Town determination subsection (1)b.1. may
proceed. Any project receiving Town determination subsection
(1)b.2. must be modified or denied if the deciding body determines
that the impact is unacceptable. In determining the acceptability of a
traffic impact, the deciding body shall consider if the project's
benefits to the community override the traffic impacts as determined
by specific sections from the general plan and any applicable specific
plan.
(2) Considerations relating to outdoor advertising. The number, location, color, size,
height, lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs and structures in
relation to the creation of traffic hazards and the appearance and harmony with
adjacent development. Specialized lighting and sign systems may be. used to
distinguish special areas or neighborhoods such as the downtown area and Los Gatos
Boulevard.
(3) Considerations relating to landscaping. The location, height, and materials of walls,
fences, hedges and screen plantings to insure harmony with adj acent development or
to conceal storage areas, utility installations, parking lots or unsightly development;
the planting of ground cover or other surfacing to prevent dust and erosion; and the
unnecessary destruction of existing healthy trees. Emphasize the use of planter boxes
with seasonal flowers to add color and atmosphere to the central business district.
Trees and plants shall be approved by the Director of Parks, Forestry and
Maintenance Services for the purpose of meeting special criteria, including climatic
conditions, maintenance, year-round versus seasonal color change (blossom, summer
foliage, autumn color), special branching effects and other considerations.
(4) Considerations relating to site layout. The orientation and location of buildings and
open spaces in relation to the physical characteristics of the site and the character of
the neighborhood; and the appearance and harmony of the buildings with adjacent
development.
Buildings should strengthen the form and image of the neighborhood (e.g.
downtown, Los Gatos Boulevard, etc.). Buildings should maximize preservation of
solar access. In the downtown, mid-block pedestrian arcades linking Santa Cruz
Avenue with existing and new parking facilities shall be encouraged, and shall
include such crime prevention elements as good sight lines and lighting systems.
(5) Considerations relating to drainage. The effect of the site development plan on the
adequacy of storm and surface water drainage. .
(6) Considerations relating to the exterior architectural design of buildings and
structures. The effect of the height, width, shape and exterior construction and design
of buildings and structures as such factors relate to the existing and future character
of the neighborhood
and purposes of the zone in which they are situated, and the purposes of architecture
and site approval. Consistency and compatibility shall be encouraged in scale;
massing, materials, color, texture, reflectivity, openings and other details.
(7) Considerations relating to lighting and street furniture. Streets, walkways, and.
building lighting should be designed so as to strengthen and reinforce the image of
the Town. Street furniture and equipment, such as lamp standards, traffic signals, fire
hydrants, street signs, telephones, mail boxes, refuse receptacles, bus shelters,
drinking fountains, planters, kiosks, flag poles and other elements of the street
environment should be designated and selected so as to strengthen and reinforce the
Town image.
(8) Considerations relating to access for physically disabled persons. The adequacy of
the site development plan for providing accessibility and adaptability for physically
disabled persons. Any improvements to a nonresidential building where the total
valuation of alterations, structural repairs or additions exceeds a threshold value
established by resolution of the Town Council, shall require the building to be
modified to meet the accessibility requirements of title 24 of the California
Administrative Code adaptability and accessibility. In addition to retail, personal
services and health care services are not allowable uses on nonaccessible floors in
new nonresidential buildings. Any change of use to retail, health care, or personal
service on a nonaccessible floor in a nonresidential building shall require that floor
to be accessible to physically disabled persons pursuant to the accessibility
requirements of title 24 of the California Administrative Code and shall not qualify
the building for unreasonable hardship exemption from meeting any of those
requirements. This provision does not effect lawful uses in existence prior to the
enactment of this chapter. All new residential developments shall comply with the
Town's adaptability and accessibility requirements for physically disabled persons
established by resolution.
(9) Considerations relating to the location of a hazardous waste management facility.
A hazardous waste facility shall not be located closer than five hundred (500) feet to
any residentially zoned or used property or any property then being used as a public
or private school primarily educating persons under the age of eighteen (18). An
application for such a facilitywill require an environmental impact report, which may
be focused through the initial study process.
■ As required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code for the demolition of a single
family residence:
1. The Town's housing stock will be maintained in that the house will be
replaced.
2. The structure has no historic significance.
3. The property owner has no desire to maintain the structure.
4. The economic utility of the structure is in fair condition.
N:\DEV\FINDINGS\54 Chester.wpd
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
54 Chester Street
Architecture and Site Application S-05-031
Requesting approval to demolish a pre-1941 residence, constrict a new single family residence and
accessory structure with reduced setbacks and request for and interpretation of the cellar policy on
property zoned R-1D. APN: 529-08-008
PROPERTY OWNER: Anna Huynh and Kevin Crane
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
(Planning Division)
1. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions
of approval listed below and in substantial compliance with the development plans dated
December 1, 2005. Any changes or modifications made to the approved plans shall be
approved by the Director of Community Development, Development. Review Committee or
the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the change(s).
2. EXPIRATION: Zoning approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to
Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code, unless the approval has been vested.
3. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM,. The applicant shall prepare and submit amemorandum
with the building permit, detailing how each of these Conditions of Approval have or will
be addressed.
4. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained prior to the issuance
of a Building, Grading or Encroachment Permit.
5. NEW TREES. The new trees to be planted shall be double-staked, using rubber tree ties and
shall be planted prior to occupancy.
6. PROTECTIVE FENCING. Prior to any construction or building permits being issued, the
applicant shall install the required protective fencing.
7. ARBORIST RECOMMENDATIONS: The Consulting Arborist recommendations dated
November 26, 2005 must be strictly adhered to, prior to and throughout construction.
8. SALVAGING OF MATERIALS. At least ten days prior to the date of demolition, the
developer shall provide to the Town a written notice and an advertisement published in a
newspaper of general circulation, regarding the availability of materials for salvage,
including the name and telephone number of a contact person. No salvaging of material shall
occur until a demolition permit has been approved by the Community Development
Department.
9. RECYCLING. All wood, metal, glass and aluminum materials generated from the
demolished structure shall be deposited to a company which will recycle the materials,
Receipts from the company(s) accepting these materials, noting type and weight of material,
shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Town's demolition inspection.
(Building Section)
10. PERMITS REQUIRED: A building permit shall be required for the addition and remodel of
the existing single family residence. Separate permits are required for site electrical,
mechanical, and plumbing work.
Page 1 of 5
Exhibit B
PAGE 2
Address: 54 Chester St
Architecture and Site Application #S-05-031
11. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue-lined in frill on
the cover-sheet of the construction plans.
12. SIZE OF PLANS: Four sets of construction plans, maximum size 24" x 36."
13. SOILS REPORT: A soils report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official,
containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with
the building permit application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer
specializing in soils mechanics. ALTERNATE: Design the foundation for an allowable soils
1,000 psf design pressure. (Uniform Building Code Volume 2 - Section 1805)
14. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or
land surveyor maybe required to be submitted to the project building inspector at foundation
inspection. This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified
in the soils report; and, the building pad elevation, on-site retaining wall locations and
elevations are prepared according to approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall
be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items:
1. Building pad elevation
2. Finish floor elevation
3.. Foundation corner locations
15. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF-1R
and MF-1R must be blue-lined on the plans.
16. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS: New wood burning fireplaces shall bean EPA Phase
II approved appliance as per Town Ordinance 1905. Tree limbs shall be cut within 10-feet
of chimneys.
17. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is requiredbyUBC Section 1701, the
architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted
to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit. The Town
Special Inspection form must be completely filled-out, signed by all requested parties and
be blue-lined on the construction plans. Special Inspection forms are available from the
Building Division Service Counter or online at www.losgatosea.gov.
18. NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION STANDARDS: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program shall be part of the plan submittal as the second
page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Service Counter for a fee
of $2 or at San Jose Blue Print.
1.9. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following agencies approval before
issuing a building permit:
1. Community Development: Judie Gilli at 399-5702
2. Engineering Department: Fletcher. Parsons at 395-3460
3. Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5777
4. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010
5. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407
6. Local School District: (Contact the Town Building Service Counter
for the appropriate school district and to obtain the school form.)
Page 2 of 5
PAGE 3
Address: 54 Chester St
Architecture and Site Application #S-05-031
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS:
(Engineering Division)
20. CARPORT. Engineering shall confine carport driveability prior to issuance of a building
permit.
21. GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town
Standard Drawings and the Town Standard Specifications. All work shall conform to the
applicable Town ordinances. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job
related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be washed into stone
drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will
not be allowed unless a special permit is issued. The developer's representative in charge
shall be at the j ob site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way
according to this condition may result in the Town performing the required maintenance at
the developer's expense.
22. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT. All work in the public right-of-way. will require a
Construction Encroachment Permit. All work over $5,000 will require construction security.
23. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS; The developer or his representative shall notify the
Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting any work pertaining to
on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the Town's right-of-way.
Failure to do so will result in rejection of work that went on without inspection.
24. CONSTRUCTION STREET PARKING. No vehicle having a manufacturer's rated gross
vehicle weight exceeding ten thousand (10,000) pounds shall be allowed to park on the
portion of a street which abuts property in a residential zone without prior approval from the
Town Engineer 15.40.070).
25. SITE DRAINAGE. Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb
drains will be allowed. Any sump outfall shall be directed to a 5' x 5'x5' dry well located a
minimum of 10-feet from property line.
26. NPDES. All pavement outside of the structure footprint shall be pervious.
27. SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. It is the responsibility of contractor and
home owner to make sure that all dirt tracked into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on
a daily basis. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris SHALL NOT be washed into
the Town's storm drains.
28. UTILITIES. The developer shall install all utility services, including telephone, electric
power and all other communications lines underground, as required by Town Code
§27.50.015(b). All new utility services shall be placed underground. Underground conduit
shall be provided for cable television service.
29. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The developer shall repair or replace all
existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of
developer's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs, gutters, sidewalks,
driveways, signs, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings,
etc. shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original
condition. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the
Engineering Construction Inspector, and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access
Page 3 of 5
PAGE 4
Address: 54 Chester St
Architecture and Site Application #S-05-031
provisions. Developer shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction
Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions.
30. SIDEWALK REPAIR. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards
any sidewalk damaged now or during construction of this project. Sidewalk repair shall
match existing color, texture and design, and shall be constructed per Town Standard Details.
The limits of sidewalk repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector.
during the construction phase of the project.
31. CURB AND GUTTER. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards
any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction of this project. New curb and gutter
shall be constructed per Town Standard Details. The limits of curb and gutter repair will be
determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the
prod ect.
32. DRIVEWAY APPROACH. The developer shall install one (1) Town standard residential
approach. The new driveway approach shall be constructed per Town Standard Details.
33.. AS-BUILT PLANS. After completion of the construction of all work, the original plans
shall have all changes (change orders and field changes) clearly marked. The "as-built" plans
shall again be signed and "wet-stamped" by the civil engineer who prepared the plans,
attesting to the changes. The original "as-built" plans shall be review and approved the
Engineering Inspector. A Mylar and AutoCAD disk of the approved "as-built" plans shall
be provided to the Town before the Faithful Performance Security or Occupancy Permit is
released. The AutoCAD file shall include only the following information and shall conform
to the layer naming convention: a) Building Outline; Layer: BLDG-OUTLINE; b) Driveway,
Layer: DRIVEWAY; c) Retaining Wall, Layer: RETA UNG WALL; d) Swimming Pool,
Layer: SWIMMING-POOL; e) Tennis Court, Layer: TENNIS-COURT; f) Property Line,
Layer: PROPERTY-LINE; g) Contours, Layer: NEWCONTOUR. All as-built digital files
must be on the same coordinate basis as the Town's survey control network and shall be
submitted in AutoCAD version 2000 or higher.
34. SANITARY SEWER LATERAL. Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by West Valley
Sanitation District and approved by the Town of Los Gatos before they are used or reused.
Install a sanitary sewer lateral clean-out at the property line.
35. SANITARY SEWER BACKWATER VALVE. Drainage piping serving fixtures which have
flood level rims less than twelve (12) inches (304.8 mm) above the elevation of the next
upstream manhole and/or flushing inlet cover at the public or private sewer system serving
such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved
type backwater valve. Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge through the
backwater valve, unless first approved bythe Administrative (Sec. 6.50.025). The Town shall
not incur any liability or responsibility for damage resulting from a sewer overflow where
the property owner or other person has failed to install a backwater valve, as defined section
103(e) of the Uniform Plumbing Code adopted by section 6.5.0.010 of the Town Code and
maintain such device in a functional operating condition. Evidence of West Valley Sanitation
District's decision on whether a backwater device is needed shall be provided prior to
issuance of a building permit.
36. CONSTRUCTION NOISE. Between the hours of 8:00 a.m.. to 8:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00
Page 4 of 5
PAGE 5
Address: 54 Chester St
Architecture and Site Application #S-05-031
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekends and holidays, construction, alteration or repair- activities shall be
allowed. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding eighty-five
(85) dBA_at twenty-five (25) feet. If the device is located within a structure on the property,
the measurement shall be made at distances as close to twenty-five (25) feet from the device
as possible. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane shall not exceed
eighty-five (85) dBA.
37. HAULING OF SOIL. Hauling of soil on or off-site shall not occur during the morning or
evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00
p.m.). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall work with the Town
Building and Engineering Department Engineering Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan
to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on or ff the project
site. This may include, but is not limited to provisions for the developer/owner to place
construction notification signs noting the dates and time of construction and hauling
activities, or providing additional traffic control. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and
other loose debris or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
N:\DEV\CONDITNS\2006\54 Chester.wpd
Page 5 of 5
January 11, 2006
54 Chester Street
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Dear Planning Commission,
We are writing to request for your approval of the design of our resident on 54 Chester
Street.
As an introductory background, the proj ect started out as a remodel. Our resident was
built in 1920's and is, therefore, classified as a historical resident even though there is no
distinguish architectural aspects to it. We have met with the historical committee .a few
times to ensure that the new design of the house meets the historical committee's
requirements. When we submitted the drawings to the planning department for review
and for approval of a building permit, they recommended to us to submit a demolition
application because the house design may go under the 50% savings requirement. We
followed the planning department's recommendation and submitted the demolition
application and hired a structural engineer, which found that the house structure was too
unsound to be saved. In additions, we paid the fees for the town architect to review the
architecture drawing as well.
At this step of the process we thought we were done, but we were notified that drawings
did not follow the town's policy about the cellar. We felt that we had spent many months
to arrive with a workable design of the resident to accommodate our needs for a big
family so it was disappointing to hear that. We decided to go ahead with the project and .
request for your approval for the following reasons as the planning commission does
have the ability to allow exceptions to the cellar policy:
1) According to the cellar policy, "the cellar shall not extend beyond the footprint of
the main building, including the attached garage". The design of our resident has
an attached deck that we considered as an extension of the eating area when our
family gets together. I believe that an attached deck can be considered more so
than an attached garage as part of the main building. The only difference is that
the attached garage is enclosed and used for storage, while the attached deck is .
open, but a considerable amount of time is spent living on it. For the purpose of
the town policy, the attached deck has the same impact as an attached garage.
2) We have a large close knit family (32 people) in that we often spend a lot of time
together, and we do need space to accommodate them.
3) The design of the cellar does not have any impact on the overall design of the
house. It is in an obscure location as the look of the resident does not change.
Exhibit C
4) The design of the cellar does not skew the look to the neighbors. In contrary, it
will enhance the value of the neighborhood.
We met with the DRC on January 3, 2006 and there was no concern about any other
portion of the design of the resident. We understand that the FAR is set for our lot size
that we have to abide by it. In all honesty, we did not realize that we have misinterpreted
the cellar policy when we were working on the design of the resident. The main intention
of the design was to have room for a big family, yet to stay within the town's policies.
We were able to fit a kitchen, an eating area, and a small sitting room on the main floor.
The cellar would provide us the sleeping area and the 17' x 18' social area that we need.
As mentioned before, the design of the resident will enhance the look and the value of the
neighborhood on Chester Street, as well as the neighborhood of Bird and Wraight Streets.
Hence, this value will generate additional property tax income for the town going from
$500 to $1000 dollars per year. We strongly feel that your approval of deck portion of
this project will result in a win-win situation.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Kevin Crane and Anna Huynh
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT DATA
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
PROPOSED
PROJECT
REQUIRED/
PERMITTED
Zoning district
R-1 D .
R-1 D
-
Land use
Single Family
Residence
Single Family
Residence
-
General Plan Designation
Lot size (sq. ft.)
5,500
5,500
5,000 minimum
Exterior materials:
• siding
2" Clapboard sidings
2" Clapboard sidings
-
• trim
wood
wood
-
• windows
plastic
plastic
-
• roofing
composite
composite
-
Building floor area:
• first floor
974
1,399
-
• second floor
0
504
-
• garage
0
220
-
• cellar
0
1,726
-
• basement
250
0.
-
• accessory buildings
0
0
-
Setbacks (ft.):
• front
15'
15'
15' minimum
• rear
30'
20'
20' minimum
• side
6'
10'
S minimum
• side street
10'
3'
S minimum
Average slope
4%
4%
Maximum height (ft.)
20'
26'
30' maximum
Building coverage
18%
29%
40% maximum
Floor Area Ratio
• house
974
3,629
sq. ft. maximum
• garage
0
220
sq. ft. maximum
Parking
0
2
two spaces minimum
Tree Removals
6
5 tree removals with
mitigation
I Sewer or septic
Sewer
Sewer
-
N:\DEV\Judie\projects\54 Chester\SFRdata-R-i-854Chester.wpd
Exhb iit D
ARCHITFICTURE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN
April 20, 2005
Ms. Judie Gilli
Community Development Department
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
P.O. Box 949
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: 54 Chester Street
Dear Judie:
IFCCIV 0
APR 2 6 2005
'f°vbr"'I UF= LO
PLgpUiVIw S GATOS
L DIVISION
I reviewed the drawings, visited the site, and reviewed the October 6, 2004 comments of the Historic
Preservation Committee.. I think the project looks pretty good. I have only a couple of suggestions that I
think would enhance the design, but which are not absolutely essential to a good design. They would be as
follows:
1. Consider wood caps and bases at the front porch columns.
2. Consider adding divided lights (real or simulated with depth similar to real divided lights) to the double
hung windows since there are already some at and near the rear of the house, and their use is fairly
common in the neighborhood.
Consider
divided light
windows
Consider column
caps and bases
Judie, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are specific issues of concern that I
did not address.
Sincerely,
CANNON DESIGN GROUP
Larry L. Cannon AIA AICP
President
TEL: 415.331.3795 FAX: 415.331.3797
180 HARBOR DRIVE. SUITE 219. SAUSALITO. CA94965
Exhbiit E
V ARBOR RESOURCES
Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree Care
A TREE INVENTORY AND REVIEW
OF THE PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE AT
54 CHESTER STREET
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
PROPERTY OWNER: Anna Huynh and Kevin Crane
APN: 529-08-008. . .
ARCHITECTURE & SITE APPLICATION S-05-031
Submitted to:
Judie Soo Gilli
Community Development Department
Town of Los Gatos
110 East Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
Prepared by:
David L. Babby, RCA
4SCA Registered Consulting Arborist 9399
ISA Certified Arborist #WE-4001A
November 26, 2005
P,O. Box 25295, San Mateo, California 94402 Email: arborresources@comcast.net
Phone: 650.654.3351 Fax: 650.240.0777 Licensed Contractor 9796763
Exhibit F
David L. Babby, Registered Carsulting Arborist November 26, 2005
INTRODUCTION
I have been asked by the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department to
review the potential tree impacts associated with a new residence proposed at 54 Chester
Street, Los Gatos. This report presents my findings and recommendations.
The plan reviewed for this report includes Sheet A-2 (Main Level Plan) by E. Gary Schloh
Architect, dated August 11/16/05. The trees' numbers, locations and canopy dimensions
are presented on an attached copy.
FINDINGS
Six trees (#1 thru 6) of Ordinance-size were inventoried for this report. Each is of non-
native origin and is of a relatively small size as their trunk diameters range from 4.5 to 7
inches. Specific data compiled for each tree is presented on the attached table.
Tree 95 was not shown on plans reviewed. Its location has been added to the attached map
and should not be construed as being surveyed.
By implementation of the proposed design, trees #2 thru 6 would be removed as they are in
direct conflict with the proposed components. Given their small size, species and/or
relatively low monetary value, I find their loss would comply with the Town's Ordinance.
Based on the condition and species of these trees, I recommend mitigation only apply to
trees 42, 3 and 6. In doing so, I suggest one tree of 36-inch boxl size be installed for each
removed (three in total).
Regarding tree #1 (a 6.5-inch Magnolia), I find it can be adequately protected provided the
recommendations presented in the next section are carefully followed and incorporated
into the construction plans.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations presented below serve as measures to adequately protect tree #1 as
well as mitigate the removal of trees #2 thru 6. Any or all recommendations are subject to
revision if the plans are revised.
1. Any new underground utilities and services must be situated outside from beneath tree
#1's canopy. This includes, if feasible, to establish the "cellar sump outfall" and any
associated trenches to be at least eight feet from tree #1's trunk.
2. The section of the proposed front walkway within eight feet of tree 41's trunk should
be established entirely on top of existing soil grade (i.e. a no-dig design).
1 Per the Ordinance, a 36-inch box size is the minimum for removed trees.
Huynh and Crane Property, 54 Chester Street, Los Gatos Page 1 of 3
Town of Los Gatos C0177177unity Development Department
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist November 26, 2005
. 3. Reference to this report should be specified on the Site Plan.
4. Any unused, existing underground utilities, lines or pipes beneath tree .#1's canopy
should be abandoned and cut off at existing soil grade.
5. Mitigation for the loss of trees #2 thru 6 should include the installation of three trees of
36-inch box size. The trees must be planted prior to final inspection and, as necessary
for support, be double-staked with robber tree ties. All forms of irrigation must be of a
drip or soaker hose system placed on the soil surface and not in a sleeve. They should
be selected from' the Town of Los Gatos list of recommended trees (available by
contacting the Planning Division).
6. Irrigation should not be sprayed or plant material installed within three to four feet of
tree 41's trunk.
7. Trenching for irrigation and lighting beneath tree #1's canopy should be in a radial
direction and established no closer than five feet from its trunk.
Tree protective fencing must be installed precisely as shown on the attached map and
established prior to any demolition, grading, surface scraping or heavy equipment
arriving on site. It shall be comprised of five-foot high chain link mounted on eight-
foot tall, two-inch diameter steel posts that are driven 24 inches into the ground and
spaced no more than 10 feet apart. Once established, the fencing must remain,
undisturbed and be maintained throughout construction until final inspection.
9. Unless otherwise approved, all construction activities must be conducted outside the
fenced area (even after fencing is removed). These activities include, but are not
limited to, the following: demolition, grading, stripping of topsoil, trenching,
- equipment cleaning, stockpiling/dumping of materials, and equipment/vehicle
operation and parking.
10. Any approved grading or trenching beneath tree #1's canopy shall be manually
performed using shovels. Roots encountered during the process shall be cleanly
severed on the tree side of any cut and immediately covered with soil. The freshly cut
ends of roots with diameters of two inches and greater should, prior to being covered,
be wrapped with a plastic sandwich bag that is tightly secured using a rubber band.
Any roots of two inches and greater in diameter found during trenching should remain
intact and tunneled beneath.
11. Any pruning of tree #1 must only be performed under the supervision of an ISA
Certified Arborist and according to ISA Standards.
12. Throughout construction during the months of May thru October, supplemental water
must be supplied every two to three weeks to tree #1. The application rate should be
50 gallons of water supplied using soaker hoses placed on the soil surface at its mid- to
outer-canopy.
Huynh and Crane Property, 54 Chester Street, Los Gatos Page 2 of 3
Town of Los Gatos C01771772117ity Development Department
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist November26, 2005
13. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited
beneath canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage beneath canopies. In
addition, fuel should not be stored nor shall any refueling or maintenance of equipment
occur within 50 feet of the tree #1's trunk (unless on the street). Additionally,
herbicides should not be applied beneath tree #1's canopy.
Attachments: Tree Inventory Table
Site Map (copy of Sheet A-2)
Hzrynh and Crane Property, 54 Chester Street, Los Gatos Page 3 of 3
Town of Los Gatos C0777117Z117ity Development Department
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
L
0,
~
0
• .
U
Cl
°0
o.
Q .
w.
a II
,
E
o .
^ r,
V
b
o.
N
.
G
oq
z.,
CU
a
0
.0
TREE
µ
c v
a
'
.
°
d
. E o
.
L,
C
c
Q
C].
a
NO..
.TREE'NAME
a
,
~
o
a
i
.
>
U
o
o..
z
a o
.1~ -F-1
1
Southern Magnolia
(Magnolia grandii fora)
6.5
20
20
100%
100%
Good
High
3
-
2
Crape Myrtle
(Lagerstroemia indica)
5
20
15
100%
50%
Good
Moderate
-
X
3
Crape Myrtle
(Lagerstroemia indica)
4.5
20
15
100%
75%•
Good
Moderate
-
X
.4-
Tree
7
30
15
75%
50%
Fair
Low
-
X
55-
Tree
F-
5.5
25
10
75%
50%
Fair
Low
-
X
X
6
Chinese Tallow
(Sapium sebiferum)
6.5
25
15
100%
50%
Good
Moderate
-
X
Site: 54 Chester Street, Los Gatos
Preparedfor: Town of Los Gatos COmnL Develop. Depart.
Prepared by: Dav1dL. Gabby, RCA November26, 2005
as ~Ir~r
~1-
~ ~ a w ty ~ I
r ~ Et . 4 I
Ii
n y r N l °'n
' jir~3 r I
u ' IJ
(y1 . 'tl ~rv [ t
L it-
, S
rig
, 14 r: 1
TOWN COUNCIL POLICY
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Subject: Cellars
Page 1 of 2
Enabling Action:
2002- 167 -
Approvolr .
Randy Attaway, Mayor
PURPOSE:
Effective
Date: October 21, 2002
General Plan policy L.P.2.3 states: "Encourage basements and cellars to provide "hidden" square
footage in-lieu of visible mass."
The following policy shall be used by staff when reviewing plans that include a cellar.
DEFINITION:
A cellar is. an enclosed area that does not extend more than four feet above the existing or finished
grade in any location. Cellars, as defined here, shall not be included in the FAR. That area of a
cellar where the building height exceeds four feet above existing or finished grade shall not be
included in this definition and'shall be included in the floor area calculation. For purposes of this
policy, whichever grade. (existing or proposed) results in the lowest building profile of a building
shall be. used.
POLICY:
In reviewing plans for cellars staff shall consider the following:
A cellar shall not extend more than four feet above the adjacent finished grade at any point
around the.perimeter of the foundation. Below grade floor area must meet the above
definition of cellar to be excluded from the floor area calculations for the structure.
If any portion of a cellar extends more than four feet above grade, that area shall be included
in the floor area calculation.
CA00cuments and Seltings\MRasmussUcal 5ettines\Temp\CeUar-p0Ucy.wpd
Revised September 20. 2002
Exhibit G
• Light and exit wells may encroach into front and side yard setbacks provided that a minimum'
three-foot wide pedestrian access is provided, around the light well(s). Light wells and
exiting shall be the minimum required to comply with the Uniform Buildind Code criteria
for natural light and ventilation.
• Below grade patios may extend out from a cellar into the required rear yard provided that a
minimum 10 foot setback is retained from the rear property line.
• Cellars and basements (except light and exit wells) shall not extend beyond the building
footprint.
• The Planning Commission may allow an exception to this policy based on extenuating or
exceptional circumstances applicable to the property including size, shape, topography,
location or surroundings. The Commission shall make findings to support such a decision.
C:1Documents and SettingANlRasmusALacal Settings\Temp\Cellar-poUcy.wpd
CADoeuments and SettingsVARasmuss\Lucal Settingsvremp\CeUer-policy.wpd
Revised September 20. 2002
PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Subject: Planning Commission Interpretation of Cellar Policy
Approved: Effective Date: October 5, 2004
Bud Lortz, 6rec or of Cow m nity Development
PURPOSE
To establish a policy on the number and location of cellars permitted under the Town Council's
Cellar Policy
SCOPE
This policy applies to cellars as defined by the Town Council Policy adopted under Resolution
2002-167.
POLICY
A cellar shall not extend beyond the footprint of the main building (included attached garage) or
detached accessory structure. One cellar is permitted per property. Additional cellars shall be
included in the floor area calculation.
N:\DEV\Judie\0utbox\2005\Po1icy - Cellarsmpd
Exhibit H
i
11 r) ;'I I
~f;n 3 !Ut1J
TOWN (-D-1- -'S r~s
CLERK DEPAR T UIENT m
Elizabeth Ansnes
56 Chester Street
Los Gatos, CA 95032
March 27, 2006
Los Gatos City Council
110 East Mail Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Re: Architecture and Site Application S-05-031
Dear Council Members,
I am writing regarding the appeal from a Planning Commission denial for a
permit to demolish and rebuild a new home at 54 Chester Street. My home
is located just west of the lot in question, and because of the way the
proposed house has been designed, I am the neighbor most impacted by the
proposal. The plans indicate that the house was moved from the footprint of
the present house to sit within a few feet of our shared property line.
A look at the plans showing the shadow lines that will be cast on my
house reveals the problem for me; this location virtually cuts off my access
to morning sun through most of the year. The plan also proposes to put a
side dormer directly opposite the only window on that side of my house. To
maintain any privacy, that window would have to be screened or otherwise
covered throughout the day.
The present siting of the house includes a wide setback on the west
side of the property, presumably designed for a future driveway. The new
plans move the house into that setback, and place the driveway on the east
side of the lot, where, at least for half its length, it is next to another
driveway and then a garage, rather than an occupied house. If you look at
the siting of the nearby houses, you will see that most of them are designed
to reduce the distance between houses and the shadowing by alternating
driveways and houses. These plans move the new house almost as close as
possible.
I have no objection to the addition of a second story to the house; I
have added one myself. But my plans worked within the footprint of the
existing house and the roof line was designed to reduce the impact on
ATTACHMENT 7
neighboring houses and maintain the mass and bulk that characterize most of
the houses on. the street. It would not require major changes in the concept
for the house to deal with these concerns. I would hope that revisions to this
proposal could address them.
Sincerely,
/ d~
Elizabeth Ansnes