18 Staff Report - 642 San Benito Avenue
DATE: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT July 21, 2004 MEETING DATE: 8102/04 ITEMNOol'i{' TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CONSIDER AN APPEAL 0 HE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A PRE-1941 RESIDENCE ON PROPERTY ZONED R-ID. ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION: 642 SAN BENITO AVENUE PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT:
THOMAS SCHAUB. APPELLANT: JULIE LIVINGSTON RECOMMENDATION: 1. Hold the public hearing and receive public testimony. 2. . Close the public hearing. (' ·3. Uphold the Planning Commission's
decision and apprOve Architecture and Site Application \ 5-04-21 with conditions. 4. Refer to the Town Attorney for the preparation of the appropriate resolution. If the Town Council
determines that the Planning Commission's decision should be reversed or modified: 1. The Council needs to find one or more of the following: (1) Where there was error or abuse of discretion
on the part of the Planning Commission; or (2) 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 (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.
PREPARED BY: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Reviewed by: Town Manager __Clerk Finance 4/--Cornmunity
Development Revised: 7/21/04 10:48 am Refonnatted: 5/30/02
PAGE 2 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF 642 SAN BENITO AVENUE July 21, 2004 If the predominant reason for modifying or reversing the decision of the Planning Commission
is new information as defined in Subsection (2) above, it is the Town's policy that the application be returned to the Commission for review in light of the new information unless the
new information has a minimal effect on the application. 2. Refer to the Town Attorney for preparation of the appropriate resolution. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting approval
to add 521 square feet to the first floor and to construct a new 775 square foot second story to an existing 953 square foot single story, pre-1941 residence. The applicant also proposes
to construct a 731 square foot basement and a 462 square foot, two-car detached garage, The total living area of the proposed residence is 2,249 square feet. For a complete analysis
of the project, please see the attached report from the Development Review Committee to the Planning Commission dated May 13, 2004 (Attachment 5) and development plans (Attachment 9).
PLANNING COMMISSION: On May 26, 2004, the Planning Commission approved the application subject to the attached conditions (Attachment 4). The verbatim minutes from the May 26,2004 Planning
Commission hearing are attached (Attachment 2). The Planning Commission heard public testimony from several property owners adjacent to the project site. The Commission added a condition
limiting the second story floor plate height to 8 feet, in response to appellant's concerns about solar access and height of the propose structure. The Planning Commission also included
a condition that the detached accessory structure shall be located five feet from the rear and side property line. APPEAL: On June 4,2004, a neighbor filed an appeal of the Planning
Commission's decision (Attachment 1). The appellant explains the specific reasons for the appeal in the attached letter (Attachment 1). In summary, the appellant asserts that 1) there
was no effort by staff to reconcile the differences between the applicant and appellant, 2) the appellant did not receive a copy of the Town's Consulting Architect's report until mid-May,
and 3) the appellant's concerns regarding solar access were not adequately addressed. The applicant has submitted a letter (Attachment 6), a rendering of the proposed house (Attachment
7) and a shadow study (Attachment 8) in response to the appeal.
PAGE 3 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: APPEAL OF 642 SAN BENITO AVENUE July 21, 2004 DISCUSSION: 1. Applicant and Appellant Opposition A notice of intent to approve the application was
sent to adjacent neighbors on November 17, 2003. The Town received a letter of concern (Exhibit C of Attachment 5) from the property owners of 644 San Benito Avenue stating their objections
to the proposed plan. When a letter of concern is received by the Town, staff forwards the letter to the applicant. It is the applicant's responsibility to work with the concerned neighbor
and resolve the issues. In this particular case, the applicant contacted the neighbor, but could not resolve the issue. Specifically, the applicant is not amenable to the appellant's
request to redesign the house to a single story structure. Since the differences were not resolved, the application was referred to the Planning Commission pursuant to Town Code. 2.
Town Consulting Architect's Report The Town Consulting Architect's report was received by staff on January 12, 2004. Staff· forwarded the report to the applicant for their review and
response. Staff does not circulate the report to other parties as it is the responsibility of the applicant to work with staff to resolve the issues identified through the architectural
review process. However, the report is available to the public for review. On May 13, 2004, staff sent the Planning Commission staff report, which included the Town Consulting Architect's
report,to the appellant in advance of the May 26, 2004 Planning Commission hearing. Staff routinely sends out Planning Commission staff reports seven days prior to the hearing. 3. Solar
Access The Planning Cornrnissiondiscussed the impacts of the proposed project as it relates to the appellant's horne, 644 San Benito Avenue. The Planning Commission reviewed the shadow
study, which was presented at the public hearing by the applicant. For remodel projects, staff and the Town's Consulting Architect focus primarily on neighborhood compatibility, architectural
design and potential privacy issues, although attention will be called to any other . significant issues. In this particular case, solar access was not discussed because it was not deemed
an issue ofconcein. . As discussed in the Planning Commission staff report, the proposed project meets all the technical Town requirements. In this instance, the proposed side setback
(adjacent to the appellant) is seven feet, where five feet is allowed by Town Code. The proposed structure is approximately twelve feet from the appellant's horne. The proposed height
is 25 feet, where 30 feet is the maximum. Additionally, the Planning Commission required that theplate height be limited to eight feet on the second story, which lowers the overall proposed
height to 24 feet.
PAGE 4 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF 642 SAN BENITO AVENUE July 21, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15301
of the State Environmental Guidelines as adopted by the Town. FISCAL JMPACT: None Attachments: 1. Notice ofAppeal (two pages) received on June 4,2004 2. Verbatim meeting minutes from
the May 26,2004 Planning Commission Hearing (5 pages) 3. Required Findings and Considerations (4 pages) 4. Recommended Conditions ofApproval (5 pages) 5. Report to the Planning Commission
from the Development Review Committee dated May 13, 2004 (31 pages, minus development plans) 6. Letter frqm applicant dated July 8,2004 (l page) 7. Rendering of the proposed house (1
page) 8. Shadow study (l page) 9. Development Plans received on March 18,2004 (5 pages) Distribution: Thomas Schaub, 1873 Grand Teton Drive, Milpitas, CA 95035 Julie Livingston and Hamish
Fa1lside, 644 San Benito Ave., Los Gatos, CA 95030 N:\DEV\Judie\projects\San Benito 642\appeal.wpd
FiLING FEES $250.00 Residential S1000 per Multifamily or Tentative Map Town of Los Gatosn==r-.·.,....,--;;-t-·'-;;lL-:'-
Office of the Town 110 E. Main St., Los Gatos 1 APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMI . I, the undersigned,
do hereby appeal a decision of the Planning Commission as follows: (PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT NEATLY) DATE OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISI.ON: f-1.£u1 2.b 1 2co4 PROJECT /APPLICATION NO: 5-�
� _ ADDRESS LOCATION: bLf 2 Sa n BenITo A-ve Pursuant to the Town Code, the Town Council may only grant an appeal ofa Plarming Commission decision in most matters if the
Council fmds that one ofthree (3) reasons exist for granting the appeal by a vote ofat least three (3) Councilmembers. Therefore, please specify how one ofthose reasons exist in the
appeal: 1. The Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion because ,ee t:...-t-I--a c heel . S hee-t;OR
2. There is new information that was not reasonably available at the time ofthe Plarming Commission decision, which is _____ (please attach the new information if possible): OR "'"
3. The Planning Commission did not have discretion to modify or address the following policy or issue that is vested in the Town Council: __ _ IF MORE SPACE IS NEEDED, PLEASE ATIACH
ADDITIONAL SHEETS. PRINT NAME: DATE: 4. 5. IMPORTANT: 1. Appeal must be filed within ten (10) calendar days ofPhmning Commission Decision accompanied by the required filing fee. Deadline
is 5:00 p.m. on the 10th day following the decision. Ifthe JOlh day is a Saturday, Sunday, or Town holiday, then it may be filed on the workday immediately following the 10th day, usually
a Monday. .The Town Clerk will set the hearing withing 56 days ofthe date ofthe Planning Commission Decision (Town Ordinance No. 1967). An appeal regarding a Change ofZone application
or a subdivision map only must be filed within 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 ofnew information, the application will usually be returned to the Planning Commission for reconsideration.
Julie LI'V1v,Jstvn 3. 2. PHONE: *** OFFICIAL USE ONLY *** .-\.TE OF PUBLIC HEARING: '6' 0· of-\ Pending Planning Department Confirmation DATE TO SEND PUBLICATION:. -,-CONFIRMATION LETTER
SENT: Date:------TO APPLICANT & APPELLANT pv. DATE OF PUBLICATION: Attacbment 1 N:\Clk\FORMS\Planning Commission Appeal.wpd Rev: 5120/02
June 4, 2004 Re: 642 San Benito Ave Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 We live at 644 San Benito Ave, and are the neighbors immediately to the adjacent to 642 San Benito,
and would like to the Planning Commission decision made 5/26/04 on Application No. S-04-21. The Planning Commision erred or abused its discretion because: 1) There was no
effort made to provide for disputes at the staff level between the owner of642 and us prior to the hearing. This is in violation ofTown code 29.20.480, subsections D and E. 2) We did
not receive a copy ofthe Town Consulting Architect's report until we were notified ofthe hearing in mid-May. The report was issued in January 2004. The owner of642 was given adequate
notice and time to respond to the report; wewere not 3) Our concerns regarding how the current plan for 642 San Benito will affect the light at ou.r.bouse at 644 San Benito have not
been adequately addressed. The shadow stu9Y presented by the owner of642 at the planning commission hearing hearing did not contain adequate detail. The Town Consulting Architect did
not address this issue in his report. The addition at 642 San Benito is potentially in violation ofTown Code 29.20.150, section 4, which provides for preservation ofsolar access to buildings.
We feel that the potential for modifications to the plans at 642 San Benito exists. We hope that a compromise can be found tln:ough our toWIl'S democratic process that will satisfy both
parties. Hamish Fallside Julie Livingston 644 San Benito Ave. Los Gatos, CA 95030
,-I 1256 A P PEA RAN C E S: Los Gatos Planning Commissioners: . Jean Drexel, Chair Michael Burke Phil Micciche Tqm O'Donnell Joanne Talesfore Morris Trevithick J.--PRO C E E DIN G S:
CHAIR DREXEL: We are going to open the public hearing to consider Architecture and Site Application S-04-2I, 642 San Benito Avenue. Would the applicant like to step forward? You have
five minutes to make your presentation, And if you'd 6 please state your name and address for the record, that would be helpful. Director OfCommunity Development: Bud N. Lortz THOMAS
SCHAUB: Yes, my name is Tom Schaub. We have bought this property with my brother, Daniel, who is my financial partner in a business, I'm a general contractor. I own Sunset West Construction,
which is a small remodeling 10 Transcribed by: Vicki L. Blandin 11 5500 Van Fleet Avenue Richmond CA 94804 12 (510) 526-6049 13 14 15 16 11 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING
COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 1 10 11 12 13 15 16 11 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 company that is a partnership with my son. We bought this dilapidated piece of property.
II's a hundred-year-old home that has not had any restoration or any maintenance done to it in fifty years plus. We bought it with the intent of developing a nice home, with the intent
hopefully of moving in myself, but I'm not clear of whether I'm able to do that now. Eventually I want to become a member of the community, because I love Los Gatos and spend a lot of
my time here. It's just a goal. I've been a licensed contractor in California for sixteen years and do a lot of this type of work, single-family homes and remodeling, and worked on this
design extensively with my architect; he did most of the design actually, We started this project with the intent of demolishing thc home, wenI though the process with the Planning Department,
and it was detennined thaI, because of the age onhe home, the Historical Committee was involved and said thatlhere was a lot of ambiance and historical value to the design of the home
and we should maintain it. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 2 Attachment 2 ----'-----------
2356 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 So we went along with that and worked extensively to comply with the Historical, to meet their recOmmendations and requirements to maintain
the initial intent when the home was built, but also to add enough square footage to make a substantial home. We did that successfully, staying within all the requirements from the Planning
Department in terms of setbacks and lot usage, FAR, heights, all the requirements we've met. We were virtually to the point of approval and there was an objection from a neighbor just
north of the property, and that's what brought us here. The intent of course is to renovate a very rundown home in a nice neighborhood, and this is what our forte is; this is what we
do. We did a compilation oflhe homes on San Benito, took the homes on either side and up and down the street, and out 0 f all the homes across the street and on the same side of the
street, out of fourteen homes, eleven are two-story homes. In fact, the person that has written the complaint about having the second story home has a twostory home. We asked all the
neighbors before we approached this project, and they all wanted the work done because it's such a dilapidated home. That person wasn't living in the home at the time, so we didn't get
their answer. The main concern is the sunlight issue, and there is a statement in what they proposed that their going to lose a hundred percent of the sunlight through some of their
windows. I did just a little analysis ofsun-and I'll put it up here-in terms of the latitude where we're at in California here. Excuse the roughness ofthis. This is basically a noon
sun for the solstices ofsummer, spring and fall. The house on the left is the one that has complained; the house on the right is our 2 10 11 12 13 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 proposed
home. So this is rough, but it's basically what bappens at noon sun these times of year. Summer is June, winter is December, and Spring Fall equinox. So the sun is basically pointing
at the lower window on the house that they were concerned with. I estimated that they're going to lose some sun between noon and 4:00 three months a year, starting from zero, up to maybe
four hours a day, over that three month period. Nine months a year there's no impact to their home from loss of sun. And lastly, the property is very overgrown with trees, and our intent
is to clear some of that out, and I really believe that their sun with improve dramatically with the work that we're proposing and the landscaping that we're going to do. CHAIR DREXEL:
All right; thank you. THOMAS SCHAUB: Thank you. CHAIR DREXEL: Commissioner Burke? COMMISSIONER BURKE: Was the diagram you showed on the screen the extent ofthe shadow studies you've
done on this? THOMAS SCHAUB: Yeah, it was a very preliminary one. It wasn't a full shadow study, because I wasn't requested 10 do that, but it was based on calculating the angle of the
sun at noon at this latitude. The direction of the north is this direction here, so the sun will pass basically through this summer, winter, and fall. The morning sun is up in this area,
noon is approximately across this 1ine here, and the afternoon sun is here. So they're really going to 'receive a lot of morning sun, and it shouldn't be affected at all until maybe
November, when the sun takes a lower path and actually is obstructed by the house to a certain degree. It's not an official study, but it's based on the 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION
5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 3 25 angles of the sun at this latitude. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 4
·,1. CHAIR DREXEL: Any other questions at this time? All right, I have a couple cards here on this Item. If anyone else wants to speak to this Item, please fill out a I would also like
to bring attention to the architect's comment as taken from Exhibit F, where the architect states that the addition sort of dominates the existing card and pass it up. First Hamish Fallside
and Julie Livingston. You plan to speak together? 5 HAMISH FALLSIDE: Present right now is only myself, Harnish Fallside, so it will just be me. CHAIR DREXEL: All right; and you live
at? HAMISH FALLSIDE: I live at 644 San Benito Avenue. I'd. like to thank 35 house. I believe there are more than enough examples of single-story Spanish architecture houses in Los Gatos
that would be equally suitable for this site and would keep the current style of the property that is there. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you. Does anyone have questions for Mr. Fallside? Mike?
COMMISSIONER BURKE: In your opinion, would a sillaller second 10 11 12 the Council for their attention to this issue and to the concerns that we raised about this development. We're
very pleased to be part of Los Gatos. We moved here approximately a year ago and took residence in the house at 644 San Benito, and our two-10 11 12 story, or maybe the second story
being set back further back from your property line help this issue significantly, or if any second story that's going to cause your problems on those windows? 13 .year-old daughter
and we look forward to many ye,ars of living here. 13 HAMISH FALLSIDE: Any second story will obscure light from our other is the master bathroom in our bedroom. Downstairs there is a
dining room and a 19 14 . 15 16 17 18 19 I wanted just to raise a few points about the communications that we've received. The findings and the exhibits state that the gentlemen had
contacted us, but could not reach any resolution to the issues. I would just like to state that we have received no attempt at communication on this issue from the applicant at all.
So I believe the required fmdings and considerations are actUiilly in error on that point. 15 16 17 18 upstairs windows, correct? COMMISSIONER BURKE: And what are the rooms thaI those
windows are in? HAMISH FALLSIDE: One oflhem is my daughter's bedroom, and the 20 As the applicant has described, our objections really stem from the loss of family room, both at the
front and at the back, 20 21 22 23 24 25 light and the impact on our living in the ho.use at 644 San Benito. The diagrams that the gentleman put up show what it will be like, but he
did not show what it is currently like just now, and I cannot accept that we would see an increase in the light as he is claiming, when the direct view from our upstairs windows will
be of the side ofhis house, whereas today it is actually clear sky between trees. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION· 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 5 21 22 23 24 25 CHAIR DREXEL:
Thank you; any more questions? Thank you, Mr. Fallside. Next is Don McKell. DON MCKELL: Good evening and thank you for giving me the opportunity. I'm Don McKell; I live at 31 Mariposa
Avenue, which is the property directly behind both 642 and 644 San Beneto. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 6
2356 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I'm thrilled that something is going to be done with the property at 642 San Benito. I've lived in my home, 31 Mariposa, for thirty-four
years and have had to put up with a couple of bizarre characters who lived in 642; they're gone now. The house is a rat hole and frankly, a collision with a comet would improve it. It's
in terrible shape, and I'm looking forward to some kind of architectural renovation that brings order to that place. The reason I'm here tonight is I've looked at the diagrams regarding
the garage only, and the garage appears to be a one-car garage. The applicant appears to be requesting a variance in the setback from the property line at the rear of the property. The
current garage is very low, and actually is virtually invisible to us from our property while we're standing anywhere in its vicinity. The garage that apparently is proposed appears
to be somewhat higher-judging from those little orange nettings that are hanging up there-and and I'm not entirely sure what goal is served by placing it closer to the back property
line is what w()uld be a standard five foot setback. So it would be my hope that the builder could move that structure forward towards the street by whatever distance it would take to
continue with the standard fivefoot setback. That's essentially my input. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you; anyone have questions? All right, thanks very much. Would anyone else like to speak
to this Item? Seeing no one, we will call the applicant back for rebuttal. THOMAS SCHAUB: In regards to your question, I don't believe we're within the setback. Our intent was to be
five foot. My architect is here; we were just LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 7 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 talking about
it now. We moved it back from the original location, because it is quite a bit forward in the property, but I believe we're definitely five feet off the back wall. And the garage is
slightly taller I think because of the parapet wall. The Historical wanted us to maintain a flat roof on the garage, and in order to provide that, we needed a little bit taller parapet
wall. But we will definitely comply with the standard setback. Maybe there's a misunderstanding, but our intent was always to keep in that setback. And in regards to the second story
proposal itself, based on the restoration of a project like this, using all wood windows and the amount of expense that goes into a home like this, this house needs a certain size to
be not dominant, which it isn't, because in the front the second story sets back quite a bit from the first story to soften the look of the home; but it has substance to it, which is
what we were trying to achieve. It's not a large home. It's 2,300-something square feet. And again, eleven out of fourteen homes right on that street are second story homes. I guess
that's all I have to say about it.CHAIR DREXEL: All right, we have a clarification from Bud Lortz about the setbacks and the garage. DIRECTOR LORTZ: The garage shows on the first sheet,
A-I of Exhibit H, at three feet from the property line. So that's the proposal, those are the plans that have been submitted. I just might point out that the garage is about eleven feet
tall. CHAIR DREXEL: Would it be possible to position the garage so it was five feet from the fence? LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 8
THOMAS SCHAUB: Yes. I know that was in our original intent. I know it got kind of close to the house. Did we move it back? We're a little perplexed; 3" we thought it was five feet. So
we'll definitely comply with that. CHAIR DREXEL: All right. I have a question about the plate height of the ceilings on the first floor and the second floor. THOMAS SCHAUB: The first
floor is eight-four, something like that, which is original. CHAIR DREXEL: Original, eight-four. 2 CHAIR DREXEL: So I remember. I remember all the discussion. THOMAS SCHAUB: You remember
the effort, right. CHAIR DREXEL: Does anyone else have questions? Joanne? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Thank you. We'll just tag a little bit more further onto the roof. You gave us a shadow
study with the hip roof. What [ was wondering was, did you ever consider with the flat roof'? I realize there are reasons that you chose the hip roof, but did you do a shadow study with"the
flat rool'? THOMAS SCHAUB: No. 10 11 12 13 14 THOMAS SCHAUB: And the second floor is nine-foot. CHAIR DREXEL: So would you have an objection to lowering the plate height on the second
floor? You can vault the ceilings, and so you end up with the same look. THOMAS SCHAUB: Well, I prefer not to, obviously. Standard 10 11 12 13 14 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: And how much
would it reduce the shadow? THOMAS SCHAUB: [actually don't think it would reduce it at all really, because in the design of a flat roof the pitch is much less of an angle than the sun
angle, so there is a small overhang on the house. 15" construction of newer custom homes is nine feet, because you get less ofa closed in 15 But a flat roof needs a parapet. The wall
actually has to be quite a bit 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 feeling, but ifwe have to go to (inaudible) or something to achieve that, it would... There was quite a lot of discussion
and effort going into the roof design of this with Historical to tty to minimize the impact of it, and we ttied to keep the house as low as we could, which actually is going to be lower
than the neighbor's house when it's completed. But yeah, again, we prefer to keep it that way, but we're open for discussion about this. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you. I know you are. I was
on the Historical Preservation Committee when you were going through it. THOMAS SCHAUB: Oh, right. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 9 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 higher at the edge of the roof than with a standard conventional gable roof, or hip roof, because as you can see, this point up here is significantly higher than this
point here. That's when you do a flat roof and have a small parapet wall, which is why the garage is taller too, because the existing house has "a parapet wall, which sticks up above
the roof, and then the roof drains accordingly. So [don't think it would help any shadowing at all. [think the low profile minimum four and twelve roo(is still the best way to mininiize
the obstruction of the sun, because if the wall was taller on the outside it would actually obstruct more. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 10
1236 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: I have another question. What was the original tile color on the original house? THOMAS SCHAUB: It's a red tile.
The existing tile is just up on top. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: I realize that. THOMAS SCHAUB: Yeah, it's a wreck. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: And that will be matched? THOMAS SCHAUB: It's
actually on the proposal to match. It's lighter on this picture than it's coming out. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: All right; thank you. CHAIR DREXEL: Are there any other questions? All right,
thank you very much. CHAIR DREXEL: All right, the public hearing is now closed; you're time to speak has ended. We will now consider this application. Anyone have comments? Mike? COMMISSIONER
BURKE: Question for Mr. Lortz. I know I've seen a lot ofgood
shadow studies in applications that come forward. Is it normal for when there are issues ofsolar access and shading that something more detailed than the shadow study we saw is done?
DIRECTOR LORTZ: We've seen more detailed shadow studies obviously. The question for the Commission is really whether or not that adequately answered the question that has been posed?
If you don't think so, then we can continue the Item and ask for a detailed 'shadow study, and that would be a question for the 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 CHAIR DREXEL:
I have a question for you also, Bud. These houses are about maybe a little more than twenty feet apart; in Los Gatos that is a pretty decent setback between two story houses and pretty
typical. Wouldn't you say that isn't abnormal? DIRECTOR LORTZ: Actually it's pretty generous. Even on a new construction in an R-18 zone, it's sixteen feet with an eight-foot setback
on each side. Narrower lots usually have a reduced setback, so this is probably generous. CHAIR DREXEL: So I guess my point is that perhaps when neighbors live together and build second
stories, the consequences are that they do end up infringing upon one another's rights to some degree, and so we are charged with balancing those rights. Would any like to make a motion?
Ifnot, I will proceed. I move to approve Architecture and Site Application S-04-2I, subject to the conditions in Exhibit B, and the additional condition that the setbacks for the garage
shall be five feet, and the ceiling height on the second floor shall be eight feet. The project is categorically exempt, pursuant to Section 15.30 I of the State Environmental Guidelines
as adopted by the Town. The considerations required by 29.21.50 of the Town Code for Architecture and Site Applications have been made. Anyone second? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: I'll second
that. CHAIR DREXEL: Call the question. All those in favor? Unanimous. Congratulations. 25 Commission. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 11 /25 LOS
GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 12
•. 1 DIRECTOR LORTZ: This matter is appealable. Again, there are forms in the Town Clerk's office. If someone does want to appeal, there is a fee for filing an 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 appeal, and the appeal must be filed within ten days. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 5/26/2004 Item #3, 642 San Benito Avenue 13 --,_..._----------_._-------_.
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR: 642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Requesting approval to construct a second story addition and reduction in side and rear yard setbacks
for an accessory structure to a pre-1941 residence on property zoned RID. APN 410-14-003 PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Thomas Schaub FINDINGS .. The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant
to Section 15301 of the State Enviroillllental Guidelines as adopted by the Town. .CONSIDERATIONS IN REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS .. As required by Section 29.20.150 ofthe 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 ofthe 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. B. The deciding body shall review the application for traffic roadway/intersection capacity and make one (1)· of the following determinations: 1. The proj
ect will not impact anyroadways and/or intersections causing Attachment 3
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 2 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 detennination subsection (l)b.1. may proceed. Any
project receiving Town determination subsection (l)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 ovelTide the traffic impacts as detelmined 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 adjacent development. $pecialized 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 matelials ofwalls, fences, hedges
and screen plantings to insure harmonywith 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 unnecessarydestruction ofexisting healthy trees. Emphasize the use ofplanterboxes with seasonal flowers to add colqr 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 ofmeeting 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 ofbuildings and open spaces in relation to the physical characteristics ofthe site and the character of the neighborhood; and the
appearance and hannony ofthe buildings with adjacent development. Buildings should strengthen the fonn 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.
, 642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-2l Page 3 (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Considerations relating to drainage. The effect of the site development plan on the adequacy
of stonn and surface water drainage. Considerations relating to the exterior architectural design of buildings and structures. Theeffect ofthe height, width, shape and exterior construction
and design ofbuildings and structures as such factors relate to the existing and future character of the neighborhood and purposes ofthe zone in which they are situated, and the purposes
ofarchitecture and site approval. Consistency and compatibility shall be encouraged in scale, massing, materials, color, texture, reflectivity, openings and other details. Considerations
relating to lighting an.d 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. Considerations relatingto access for physically
disabled p€}rsOlis. 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 byresolution 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, perso'nal 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 nonreside:ntial
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 ofthis
chapter. All new residential developments shall comply with the . Town's adaptability and accessibility requirements for physically disabled persons established by resolution. . 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
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 4 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 be focused through the initial study process. N:\DEV\Judie\projects\San Benito 642\Findings.wpd
,/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR: 642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Requesting approval to construct a second story addition and reduction in side and rear
yard setbacks for an accessory structure to a pre-1941 residence on property zoned RID. APN 410-14-003 PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Thomqs Schaub 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 plans received by the Town on March 18,2004. Any changes or modifications made to the approved plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development
or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the change(s). 2. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL: This Architectural and Site application will expire two years from the date of this approval
unless the approval is used before expiration. Section 29.20.335 defines what constitutes the use of of an approval granted under the Zoning Ordinance. 3. 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 the type and weight of each material, shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Town's demolition inspection. 4. TREE REMOVAL PER:MIT: A tree removal permit shall be obtained
for any trees proposed for removal prior to the issuance of a building or Encro"achment Permit. 5. All windows and doors shall be wood. No snap in grids or grids inside the windows are
permitted. Simulated wood grids are acceptable (ie: one glass pack with grids applied by manufacturer to inside, outside and between glass), to read as a true divided light window. Vinyl
clad windows are not permitted. 6. The house can be re-stuccoed provided that the stucco will match the existing. The replacement of the stucco will not classify as a demolition. 7.
Add planting pot balconies below all windows. 8. . Add molding below the bay window and the wal1/soffitjoints. 9. PLATE HEIGHT: Plate height shall be limited to eight feet on the second
story. 10. GARAGE SETBACK: The detached garage shall be located five feet from the rear and side property line. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT: ·11. PERMITS REQUIRED:
A building permit shall be required for the addition to the existing single family residents. A separate building permit is required for the demolition of the existing detached garage,
construction of the new detached garage, and Attachment 4
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 2 site retaining walls; separate electrical/mechanical/plumbing pennits shall be required as necessary. 12. CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue-lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans 13. SIZE OF PLANS: Four sets of construction plans, maximum size 24" x
36." 14. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application and a Bay Area Air Quality Management Application from the Building Service Counter. Once the demolition
form has been completed and all signatures obtained return the completed form to the Building Service Counter with the J# Certificate, three (3) sets of site plans to include all existing
structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and P.G.&E. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a permit from the Town. 15. SOILS REPORT: A soils
report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official, containing foundation and 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 foundation for an allowable soils 1,000 psf design pressure. (Uniform
Building Code Volume 2 -Section 1805) 16. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall 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: a. Building pad elevation b. Finish floor elevation c. Foundation comer locations 17. RESIDENTIAL TOWN ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: The residence shall be designed
with adaptability features for single family residences per Tbwn Resolution 1994-61 : a. Wooden backing (2" x 8" minimum) shall be provided in all bathroom walls, at water closets, showers
and bathtubs located 34 inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars. b. All passage doors shall be at least 32 inches wide on the -accessible
floor. c. Primary entrance shall have a 36-inch wide door including a 5' x 5' level landing, no more than 1 inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level with an I8-inch
clearance. d. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance.
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 3 18. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF1R and MF-1R must be blue-lined on
the plans. 19. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS: New wood burning fireplaces shall be an EPA Phase II approved appliance as per Town Ordinance 1905. Tree limbs shall be cut within 10-feet of
chimneys. 20. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: This project requires a Class A roofing assembly. 21. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by UBC 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. 22. 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. 23. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following agencies approval before issuing a building
permit: Community Development: Judie Gilli at 399-5702 Engineering Department: Fletcher Parsons at 395-3460 Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5777 Santa Clara County Fire Department:
(408) 378-4010 West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407 Bay Area Air Quality Management District: (415) 771-6000 Local School District: (Contact the Town Building Service Counter
for the appropriate school district and to obtain the school form. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS: (Engineering Division) ·24. 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 in the Town performing the required maintenance at the developer's expense. 25.. 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. 26. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS. The
developer or his representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting an 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 ow work that went on without inspection.
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 4 27. SITE DRAINAGE. Rainwater leaders shall be to splash blocks. No through curb drains will
be allowed. 28. 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. 29. The developer shall install all utility
services, including telephone, electric power and all other underground, as required by Town Code §27.50.015(b). Allp.ew utility services shall
be placed underground. Underground conduit shall be provided for cable television service. 30. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC Th1PROVEMENTS. The developer shall repair or replace all existing
improvements not designated fOJ; removal that are damaged or removed because of developer's .operations. 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.
Existip.g improvyment to be rypaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector, and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. Developer
shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of to verify existing conditions. 31. 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 Detail. 32. CURB AND GUTTER. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any curb and gutter damageci now or during construction
ofthis ofthis project. New curb and gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail. 33. DRIVEWAY APPROACH. The developer shall install one (1) Town standard residential driveway
approach.. The new driveway approach shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail. 34. PLANS. After completion ofthe construction of all work, the original plans shall
have all changes (change orders and field changes) clyarly marked. The "as-built" plans shall again be signed and "wet-stamped" by the civil engineer who ]?repared the plans, attesting
to the changes. The original "as-]:milt" plans shall be review and approved the El).gineering Inspector. A Mylar and AutoCAD disk of the approved "asbuilt" plans shall he provided to
the Town. before the Faithful Performance Security or Occupancy Penp.it is relyased. The ,AutoCADfily shall i,nclude only the following information and shall conform to the layer naming
convention: a) Bujlding Outline, Layer: BLDG-OUTLINE; b) Driveway, Layer: DRIVEWAY; c) Retaining Wall, Layer: Layer: RETA.ll\l1NG WALL; d) SwimmingPool, Layer: SWIMMING-POOL; e) Tennis
Court, Layer: TENN;rS-COURT; f) Property Lipe, ;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 be submitted in version 2000 or higher. 35. SANITARY SEWER LATERAL. Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by West Valley Sanitation
District and approved by the Tpwn of Los Gatos before they are used or reused. Install a sanitary sewer lateral clean-out at the property line.
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 5 36. CONSTRUCTION NOISE. Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 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. (Parks and Forestry Division) 37. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AERATION: All impervious surfaces encroaching
under the dripline of existing treeS shall have aeration tubes installed and the locations of the tubes shall be shown on the plans. 38. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS: Any buildings under the
dripline of existing trees shall have a foundation built from pier and grade beam to minimize impaction on existing trees. 39. IRRIGATION SYSTEM: All newly-planted landscaping shall
be irrigated by an inground irrigation system. Special care shall be taken to. avoid irrigation which will endanger existing native trees and vegetatioI1. . 40. TREES: All existing and
proposed trees are required to remain on the site as a condition --of approval. 41. DOUBLE STAKING: All newly planted trees are required to be double staked to Town standards. 42,. TREEPROTECTION
FENCING: Tree protection fencing shall be placed at the dripline ,of existing trees to be saved in the area of construction prior to the issuance of any permits. Fencing shall be a four-foot
in high chain link fence attached to steel poles driven two feet into the ground when at the dripline of the tree. If the fence has to be within eight feet of the trunk of the tree a
fence base may be used as in a typical rentable chain link fence. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT: 43. REVIEW: Review of this Development proposal is limited
to acceptability of site access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance
with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall acquire all applicable construction permits from the building department. . . 44. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: Fire
flow for this project is 1,000 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure. The required fire flow is available from area water mains and fire hydrant(s) which are spaced at the required spacing.
N:\DEV\CONDITNS\642 San Benito b.wpd
/REPORT TO: FROM: LOCATION: FINDINGS: CONSIDERATIONS: ACTION: EXHIBITS: A. REMARKS: Date: -=2.:::..00",-4..:-For Agenda Of: _---=M:..;..::..=a..;.-y-=2=6-'-,=20"
",0::...4.:-Agenda Item: .:::...3 _ The Planning Commission The Development Review Committee 642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Requesting approval to construct
a second story addition and reduction in side and rear yard setbacks for an accessory structure to a pre-1941 residence on property zoned RID. APN 410-14-003 . PROPERTY OWNERJAPPLICANT:
Thomas Schaub DEEMED COMPLETE: May 4, 2004 FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION BY: December 4, 2004 As required by Section 15301 of the State Environmental Guidelines as adopted by the Town that
this project is Categorically Exempt. As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for Architecture and Site applications. The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless
appealed within ten days. A. Required Findings and Considerations (4 pages) B. B. Recommended Conditions of Approval (5 pages) C. Letter of opposition from neighbor dated November 20,2003
(l page) D. Letter of justification from applicant dated March 1, 2004 (3 Pages) E. Project Data Sheet (1 page) F. Letter from Town Consulting Architect dated January 12,2004 (6 pages)
G. Letter of from applicant dated April 20, 2004 (2 pages) H. Development Plans dated March 18,2004 Attachment 5 1. Project Description The applicant is requesting approval to add 521
square feet to the first floor and construct a 775 new second story to an existing 953 square foot single story, pre-1941 residence. The applicant also proposes to construct a 731 square
foot basement and a 462 square foot, . two-car detached garage. The totalliving area of the proposed residence is 2,249 square feet.
The Planning Commission -Page 2 642 San Benito Avenue/S-04-21 May 26, 2004 Staff has reviewed the proposed project according to the Town's development standards. The proposed residence
meets all the technical requirements including floor area ratio (FAR), lot coverage, height and setbacks. The applicant has requested a three-foot rear and sideyard setback. The zoning
ordinance allows for this reduction from the typical five foot requirement for the detached garage. A 3 foot setback is typical for this neighborhood. Examples of colors and materials
for the proposed house will be presented by the applicant at the Planning Commission hearing. A project data sheet is attached (Exhibit E) which provides a summary of the proposed project.
A letter of justification ffom the application is attached (Exhibit D). 2. Historical Preservation Commission On May 7,2003, the Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) considered a preliminary
request to deIIl:0lish the existing house; Although the house is in a deteriorated condition, the Cornrpittee stated that the structural report submitted did not justify that the house
was unsalvageable. The Committee further stated that the house has significant architecture character and should be saved. applicant chose not to pur$ue a demolition request and
filed for a second story addition application. On September 17, 2003, the Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) reviewed the proposed project and recommended approval of the project,
subject to the conditions listed below. The applicant revised the plans according to the following conditions as recommended by the HPC: • At tb,e front elevation, a tiled projection
shall be added over the porch area as existing and an eyebrow shall be added over the stairwell windows. • The second floor stair well wall shall be straightened. • The roofing material
noted on the roof plan
and elevations are inconsistent. The roofing material shall be ten;a cqtta. • At the left elevation, the chiI):lIley shall be canted. • The size and number of lights lights for the upper
windows shall be consistent. • Window lights shall be added to the upper portion of the rear door and the balcony doors. • The balcony railing shall be a wrought iron mission style.
• All windows and doors shall be wood. No snap in grids or grids inside the windows are permitted. Simulated wood grids are acceptable (i.e., one glass pack with grids applied by manufacturer
to inside, outside and between glass), to read as a true divided light window. Vinyl clad windows are not permitted. • The house can be re-stuccoed provideci that the stucco will match
the existing. The replacement of the stucco will not classify as a demolition.
The Planning Commission -Page 3· 642 San Benito Avenuel S-04-21 May 26, 2004 3. Neighborhood Compatibility The homes in the immediate neighborhood of the subject property range in size
from 852 square feet (FAR .13) to 6,128 square feet (FAR .56). There is a mix of single and two story homes in the immediate neighborhood. The house north of the .site is a two story,
2,245 square foot home and the house· to the south is a one story, 1,269 square foot home. All the homes across from the project site are two story homes. The following table is a summary
of home size for the immediate neighborhood. Location APN Lot Size (SF) Building Size (SF) FAR 647 San Benito Ave. 410-13-018 6,426 *1,825 .28 645 San Benito Ave. 410-13-019 7,384 *2,136
.29 641 San Benito Ave. 410-13-020 6,936 *1,110 .16 639 San Benito Ave. 410-13-021 13,020 *2,074 .16 635 San Benito Ave. 410-13-022 10,150 *2,931 .29 633 San Benito Ave.
10,850 . *6,128 .56 629 San Benito Ave. 410-13-024 8,160 *2,823 .35 565 San Benito Ave. Ave. 410-13-039 19,012 1,656 .09 561 San Benito Ave. 410-13-040 15,375 2,120 .14 615 San Benito
Ave. 410-13-042 8,712 3,025 .35 630 San Benito Ave. 410-14-001 6,649 2,245 .34 640 San Benito Ave. 410-14-002 6,649 1,269 .19 642 San Benito Ave. 410-14-003 6,540 *2,249 (proposed) .34
644 San Benito Ave. 410-14-004 6,540 . *2,245 .34 35 Mariposa Ave. 410-14-005 6,540 1,029 .15 620 San Benito Ave.. 410-14-026 2,756 *1,732 .63 253 San Mateo Ave. 410-14-027 3,640 852
.13 52 AshIer Ave. 410-14-048 6,050 *2,136 .35 * two story homes Ir
The Planning Commission -Page 4 642 San Benito Avenue/S-04-21 May 26, 2004 4. Neighbor Concern A notice of intent to approve the application was sent to adjacent neighbors on November
17,2003. At that time, staff was in support of the proposal and had intentions to approve the project. The Town received a letter of concern from the property owners of 644 San Benito
Avenue (Exhibit C): The following is a summary of their concerns: • The (proposed) second story would significantly affect the light into their house. • The proposed
development would block the windows, causing them to have no direct sunlight on the south side of the house. • Towards the rear of their house, the exposure to light will be reduced
by 60 to 80 percent. The concerned neighbor suggested that the proposal be changed to a one-story addition with a one-car garage. The applicant has contacted the neighbor to discuss
their concerns, but could not resolve the issues. As stated previously in this report, there are several two-story homes in the immediate neighborhood that are similar in square footage
and FAR. Staff has reviewed this proposal according to the residential design guidelines and found the proposed project to be compatible with the surrounding homes. The Director of Community
Development has the authority to approve minor residential application if the project complies with all Town development stl',lndaros and the neighbors are not in opposition. Since a
neighbor has filed a letter in opposition to the proposed project, the application has been referred to the Planning Commission pursuant to Town Code. 5. Design Review Due to the neighbor's
concern, the plans were sent to the Town's Consulting Architect reviewed who developed two alternatives (Exhibit F). The first alternative is to make the proposed roof flat, similar
to the existing roof line and to offset the additional from the existing house in an attempt to meet the neighbor's concern. Th,e addition of shutters, pot shelf balconies below windows,
projecting trim, exposed rafter tails and projecting molding at the rear bay window were recoIl).lJlended. The second alternative is not much of-a departure from the proposed plan, but
would add architectural elements to provide visual interest to the north side of the house. Staff and the Town's Consulting Architect also identified two other issues of concern, the
flat roof form at the second story level as it relates to the hip roofs and the overhanging second floor element toward the right rear ofthe house.
The Planning Commission -Page 5 642 San Benito Avenue/S-04-21 May 26, 2004 The applicant has considered these recommendations and has revised the plan to incorporate the most significant
design aspects ofthe second alternative while also adhering to the direction given by the HPC. Please see response letter from applicant (Exhibit G). The following is a summary of the
Town's Consulting Architect's recommendations for the second alternative and the applicant's response. 1. Add planting pot balconies. Staffnote: Applicant agreed to this addition. Required
as a condition of approval. 2. Add projecting rafter tails. Staffnote: Incorporated into plans. 3. Add molding below the bay window and the wall/soffit joints. Staff note: Applicant
agreed to this addition. Required as a condition of approval. 4. Add shutters. Staffnote: The applicant has chosen not to install shutters because the HPC felt that shutters are mappropriate
for the proposed structure which added a new architectural element to the existing structure. 5. Modify the flat roof at the stair welL Staff note: The applicant has chosen not to incorporate
this modification because HPC felt that the existing proposal was . appropriate. 6. Add wood beams or divide the arch into several small arches on the right elevation..
Staffnote: The applicant has chosen not to incorporate this modification because the HPC recommended against the use of extensive trim details since it would be a new architectural element
to the structure. The:aPC did specifically discuss the use of smaller arches. 6. Staff Comment Large additions to small, one story flat roofed Spanish Eclectic style homes can be difficult
to integrate. The HPC has struggled with these types of applications in the past. As stated by the Town's Consulting Architect, "There is no easy solution to this issue." There are five
different roof types associated with Spanish Eclectic style houses which include the two options discussed by the HPC and the Town's Consulting Architect, a flat .roof and a hipped roof.
The HPC recommended combining a hipped.and flat roof.second story with the existing flat roof first floor. The HPC determined that a flat roof would make the structure appear too boxy
and the structure would appear too massive. The hipped roof pitch was kept low to maintain the Spanish Eclectic style. The hipped roof would increase the house height approximately 3.5
feet compared to the use of a flat roof. As stated earlier in this report, the Town Consulting Architect's first recommendation is to incorporate a flat roof for the second story addition
to maintain the existing flat roof house design. The Consulting Architectfelt that this approach would appear to have less bulk than using a hipped roof for the second floor. The Consulting
Architect also recommended offsetting the addition in an attempt to mitigate neighbor concerns. The Consulting Architect's second alternative is the hip roof recommended by the HPC with
some changes.
The Planning Commission -Page 6 642 San Benito Avenue, S-04-21 May 26, 2004 B. RECOMMENDATION: In considering the comments from the HPC and the Consulting Ar9hitect, staff believes that
the use of a hipped and flat roof for the second story is aesthetically the best approach. Compared to a second story flat roof, a hipped roof softens the second story and is more in
keeping with the two story Spanish Eclectic styles that are typical of Los Gatos. Staff finds that the revised plans with the recommended conditions of approval are an acceptable design.
If the Commission finds that modifications are necessary to reduce the mass and scale (ie. reduce square footage) of the structure, the Commission may approve the project with appropriate
conditions, directing staff to work with the applicant to address the concern. If the. Planning Commission is satisfieci with the current proposal, it should: 1) Make. the
findings and considerations (Ex.hibit A); 2) Approve the Architecture Site application application subject to the conditions in Exhibit B and as shown on the development plans (Exhibit
H). If the Commission determines that changes are required to the proposed application, it should do one of the following: 1) Approve the proposed application with additional conditions.
2) Continue the matter to a date certain with direction to the applicant and/or staff. 3) Deny the application. Prepared by: Judie Gilli, Assistant Planner BNL:JG cc: Thomas Schaub,
1873 Grand Teton Drive, Milpitas, CA'95035 Julie Livingston and Harn,ish Fallside, 644 San Benito Ave., Los Gatos, CA 95030 N:\DEVVudie\projects\San Benito 642\Staff report.wpd
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR: 642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Requesting approval to construct a second story addition and reduction in side and rear yard setbacks
for an accessory structure to a pre-1941 residence on property zoned RID. APN 410-14-003 PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Thomas Schaub FINDINGS • The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant
to Section 15301 of the State Environmental Guidelines as adopted by the Town. CONSIDERATIONS IN REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS • As required by Section 29.20.150 ofthe 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 proj ect 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. B. The deciding body shall review the application for traffic roadway/intersection capacity and make one (1) of the following determinations: 1. The proj
ect will not impact anyroadways and/or intersections causing Exhibit A
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 2 the roadways and/or intersections to exceed their available capacities. 2. The project will impact a roadwaY(s)
and/or causing the roadway(s) and/or intersection(s) to exceed their available capacities. Any project receiving Town determination subsection (l)b.l.
may proceed. Any project receiving Town determination subsection (l)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 t9 the community ov.erride the traffic impacts as determined by specific sections from the
general plan and any applicable specific plan. (2) Consiqerations relating to Qutdoor advertising. The number, location, color, size, height, lighting imd landscaping of outdoor advertising
signs and structures in relation to the creation of traffic hazards and the appearance and harmony harmony with adj acent development. Specialized lighting and sign systems may be used
to distinguish special areas or rieighborhoods such as the downto,:"narea and Los Gatos Boulevard.. (3) Considerations relating to landscaping. The location, height, and materials ofwalls,
fences, hedges and screen plantings to insure harmonywith adjacent development or to conceal storage areas, utility installations, parking lots or unsightly development; the planting
ofground 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 ofmeeting special
criteria, including climatic conditions, maintenance, year-round versus seasonal color ch,ange (blossom, summer foliage, autumn color), special branching effects and other considerations.
(4) Considerations relating to site layout. The orientation and location ofbuildings and open spaces in relation to the physical characteristics ofthe 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.
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 3 (5) Considerations relating to drainage. The effect ofthe site development plan on the adequacy of stonn 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
ofbuildings and structures as such factors relate to the existing and future character of the neighborhood and purposes ofthe 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 oftitle 24 ofthe 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 ofa hazardous waste managementfacility. 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
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 4 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 be focused through the initial study process. N:\DEV\Judie\projects\San Benito 642\Findings.wpd
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR: 642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Requesting approval to construct a second story addition and reduction in side and rear yard
setbacks for an accessory structure to a pre-1941 residence on property zoned RID. APN 41014-003 PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Thomas Schaub TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF CO:M:MUNITY
DEVELOPMENT (Planning Division) ·1. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL: This Architectural and Site application will expire two years from the date ofthis approval unless the approval is used before
expiration. Section 29.20.335 defines what constitutes the use of an approval granted under the Zoning Ordinance. 2. 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 the type and weight of
each material, shall be submitted tot he Town prior to the Town's demolition inspection. 3. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: A tree removal permit shall be obtained for any trees proposed for removal
prior to the issuance of a building or Encroachment Permit. 4. All windows and doors shall be wood. No snap in grids or grids inside the windows.are permitted. Simulated wood grids are
acceptable (ie: one glass pack with grids applied by manufacturer to inside, outside and between glass), to read as a true divided light window. Vinyl clad windows are not pennitted.
5. The house can be re-stuccoed provided that the stucco will match the existing. The replacement of the stucco will not classify as a demolition. 6. Add planting pot balconies below
all windows. 7. Add molding below the bay window and the wall/soffit joints. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT: .8. . PERMITS REQUIRED: A building permit shall be required
for the addition to the existing single family residents. A separate building permit is required for the demolition of the existing detached garage, construction of the new detached
garage, and site retaining walls; separate electrical/mechanical/plumbing permits shall be required as necessary. 9. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue-lined
in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans 10. SIZE OF PLANS: Four sets of construction plans, maximum size 24" x 36." 11. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS: Obtain a Building Department
Demolition Application and a Bay Area Air Quality Management Application from the Building Service Counter. Once the demolition fonn has been completed and all signatures Exhibit B
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 2 obtained return the completed form to the Building Service Counter with the J# Certificate, three (3) sets of site
plans to include all existing structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and P.G.&E. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a permit from tile
Town. 12. 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 VolUIJ1e 2 -Section 1805) 13. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall be submitted
to'the proiect 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: a: Building pad elevation·; b.Finish floor elevation c. Foundation corner locations 14. RESIDENTIAL TOWN ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS:
The residence shall be designed with adaptability features for single family residences per Town Resolution 1994-61 : a. Wooden backing (2" x 8" minimum) shall be provided in all bathroom
walls, at water closets, showers and bathtubs located 34 inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars. b. All passage doors shall be
at least 32 inches wide on the accessible floor. c. Primary entrance shall have a 36-inch wide door including a 5' x 5' level landing, no more than 1 inch out of plarie with the immediate
interior floor level with an 18-inch clearance. . . d. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance. 15. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: California Title 24 Energy
Compliance forms CFlR and :MF-IR must be blue-lined on the plans. 16. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS: New wood burning fueplaces shall be· an EPA Phase II approved appliance as per Town Ordinance
1905. Tree limbs shall be cut within 10-feet of chimneys. 17. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: This proiectrequires a Class A roofing assembly. 18. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection
is required by UBC 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.
i i, 642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-2l Page 3 The To\VIl Special Inspection fonn must be completely filled-out, signed by all requested parties and be.
blue-lined on the construction plans. Special Inspection fonns are available from the Building Division Service Counter. 19. NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION STANDARDS: The To\VIl 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. 20. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following agencies approval before .issuing a building pennit: Community Development: Judie Gilli at 399-5702 Engineering Department:
Fletcher Parsons at 395-3460 Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5777 Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407 Bay Area
Air Quality Management District: (415) 771-6000 Local School District: (Contact the Town Building Service Counter for the appropriate school district and to obtain the school fonn. TOTHE
SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS: (Engineering Division) 21. GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted To\VIl Standard Drawings
and the To\VIl Standard Specifications. All work shall confonn to the applicable To\VIl ordinances. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job related dirt and debris
at the end ofthe 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 pennit 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 in the To\VIl performing the required maintenance at the developer's expense. 22. ENCROAClTh1ENT 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 an work pertaining to on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the To\VIl's right-of-way. Failure to do so will
result in rejection ow work that went on without inspection. 24. SITE DRAINAGE. Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through . curb drains will be allowed. 25.
SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. It is the responsibility of contractor and home O\VIler 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 To\VIl'S stonn drains. 26. UTILITIES. The developer shall install all utility services, including
telephone, electric power and all other communications lines underground, as required by To\VIl Code
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 4 All new utility services shall be placed underground. Underground conduit shall be
provided for cable television service. 27. 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 inlprovement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the
direction ofthe Engineering Construction Inspector, and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. Developer shall request a walk·through with the Engineering Construction
Inspector before the start of construction to verifY existing conditions. 28. SIDEWALK REPAIR. The The developer shallrepair and replace to existing Town standards any sidewalk damaged
now or during construction ofthis' proiect. Sidewalk repair shall match existing color, texture and design, and shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail. 29. 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 an9-gutter sl;1all' be constructed per
Town Standard Detail. .' 30. DRIVEWAY APPROACH. The developer shall install one (l) Townstandard residential driveway approach.. The new driveway approach shall be constructed per Town
Standard Detail. 31. AS-BUILT ,PLANS. After completion ofthe 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 originallas-buUt" plans shall be review and approved
the Engineering Inspector. A Mylar and AutoCAD disk offue approved "asbuilt" plans shall be provided to the Town before the Security or Occupancy
Permit is released. The AutoCAD file shall inc1qde only the following information and shall conform to the layer naming convention: a) Building Outline, Layer: BLDG-OUTLINE; b) Driveway,
Layer: DRIVEWAY; t) Retaining Wall, Layer: RETAINlNG WALL; d) Swimming Pool. La,yer: SWIMMING-POOL; e) Tennis Court, Layer: TENNIS-COURT; f) Property Line, Layer: PROPERTY-LINE; g) Contours,
Layer: NEWCQNTOUR. All as-built digital files must be GU the same coordinate basis as the Town's,sUrvey control network. and shall be submitted inAutQCAD version 2000 or
32. SANITARY SEWER 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. 33. CONSTRUCTION
NOISE. Between the hours of 8:00 to 8:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekends and holidays, construction; alteration or repair activities shall be allowed. No
individual piece of equipment shall a'noise level exceeding eighty-five (85) dBA at twenty-five (25) feet. Ifthe device is located within a structure On the property,
the measurement s4all be made at distances as c:;loseto 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.
642 San Benito Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-04-21 Page 5 (Parks and Forestry Division) 34. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AERATION: All impervious surfaces encroaching under the dripline
of existing trees shall have aeration tubes installed and the locations of the tubes shall be shown on the plans. 35. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS: Any buildings under the dripline of existing
trees shall have a foundation built from pier and grade beam to minimize impaction on existing trees. 36. IRRiGATION SYSTEM: All newly-planted landscaping shall be irrigated by an inground
irrigation system. Special care shall be taken to avoid irrigation which will endanger existing native trees and vegetation. 37. TREES: All existing and proposed trees are required to
remain on the site as a condition of approval. 38. DOUBLE STAKING: All newly planted trees are required to be double staked to Town standards. 39. TREE PROTECTION FENCING: Tree protection
fencing shall be placed at the dripline of existing trees to be saved in the area of construction prior to the issuance of any permits. Fencing shall be a four-foot in high chain link
fence attached to steel poles driven two feet into the ground when at the dripline of the tree. If the fence has to be within eight feet of the trunk of the tree a fence base may be
used as in a typical rentable chain link fence. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTJ\.1ENT: 40. . REVIEW: Review of this Development proposal is limited to acceptability
of site access and water supply as they pertain to fIre department operations. and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted
model codes. . Prior to performing any work. the applicant shall acquire all applicable· construction permits from the building department. 41. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: Fire flow for this
proiect is 1.000 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure. The required fire flow is available from area water mains and [lIe hydrant(s) which are spaced at the required spacing. N:\DEV\Judie\projects\San
Benito 642\Conditions of approval.doc . ,
Julie Livingston & Hamish Fallside 644 San Benito Ave Los Gatos CA 95030 To the LG Planning Corrunission, We are the owners and residents of 644 San Bento Ave, next door to 642San Benito
Ave on the Mariposa Ave side. We have seen the story poles and reviewed the plans for the rennovation of . 642 San Benito Ave, and would like to express our views on the subject. The
addition of a second story would significantly affect the light into our house on that side, and for this reason we oppose the addition of a second story. There are four windows on our
house that face 642 San Benito Ave, and would be affected; one each in four rooms, two upstairs and two downstairs. The upstairs and downstairs windows towards the front of the house
would be blocked 100%, meaning that we would see no sky and receive no direct sunlight through these windows. In the case of the downstairs room, our dining room, this is the sole window
and the only source of direct light. Towards the rear of the house the two windows, one upstairs and one downstairs, would have their exposure to light reduced by 60-80%. We understand
that the current house at 642 San Benito Ave is too small by today' s standards, and appreciate the need to expandthe living space. We also understand that the current owner of 642 San
Benito Ave does not intend to live in the house but is a developer looking to sell the house upon completion ofthe renovation.. We, on the other hand, will have to live with what is
built on the lot. In our opinion an expansion could be accomplished with a single story, as the lot size is large and would permit this. With a single story, the garage would have to
accommodate one car instead of two, but the garage could be built in an L-size shape to create extra storage ifthat is desirable. There is plentiful on-street parking in the neighborhood.
Thankyou for your consideration, Yours faithfully Julie Livingstoli Harnish Fallside Exhibit: C
May 1,2004 Tom Schaub 1873 Grand Teton Dr. Milpitas, Ca. 95035 To: Ms. Judie Gilli Town ofLos Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, Ca 95032 Property Address: 642 San Benito Dear Ms. Gilli,
This intent of this' letter is to provide an overview of our position regarding the second story addition proposed at the above captioned address. Upon first purchasingthis property,
our intent was to take a dilapidated, broken down house and tum it into a beautiful home that adds significantly to this quaint Los Gatos neighborhood. We began this process with the
Los Gatos Planning Department and the Los Gatos Historical Committee. After a significant effort, all parties felt that we had accomplished our goal of designing a structure that blended
into the profile of the neighborhood while maintaining the integrity ofthe original design ofthis 100 year old home. The design included a significant addition of floor area that is
necessary to give the home substance, to provide the home with a similar size as is prevalent in this neighborhood, and to make the restoration ofthe home feasible. Because ofthe large
porch area, the detached garage, the long driveway to the garage, and the relatively small lot, it was necessary to add living area by incorporating a basement area as well as a moderate
second story. This accomplishes two objectives, one is to provide the addition square footage required, and two is to provide the house with some design presence in the overall structure.
During the neighbor hood approval ofthis process, the adjacent neighbors were informed of our intent to add a second story on the house and all parties that we spoke to thought . this
was a good plan except for the neighbor immediately north of the house. two houses are separated by a large setback and a driveway, the separation totals 20 feet between the structures.
In addition, their home is a 2 story home and is at least 3 feet taller than our proposed structure. They have speculated that their light will be dramatically affected by our proposed
addition, but in fact they have minimal sun exposure now due to all the overgrow oftrees on the property. The property that we purchased on San Benito has been neglected for a half of
century or more. The overgrowth of bushes and trees on the property is dominant. We believe that with the construction of our proposed addition, in conjunction with the removal of some
of the incredible overgrowth oftrees and the trimming of others, that our neighbors sunlight exposure will actually improve markedly. Exhibit D
In conclusion, it is our intent to really beautify this property and make it a wonderful addition to this neighborhood. There is a sense of excitement and anticipation about this project
among the neighbors that we have spoken to, and I believe that the Historical and Planning departments are pleased with the final design. So everyone that this proposed remodel/restoration
affects are pleased to be rid of this eyesore except for one party. We are grateful for all the departmental support that we have received and are looking forward to the acceptance of
this project from the Planning Commission and are excited about getting the restoration underway.
""_./.... i Property Infonnation to the Homes Adjacent to 642 San Benito Ave. (#) ADDRESS APN# LOT SIZE BLDGSrZE FAR 1 or2 STORY '(1) 35 Mariposa 410-14-005 6540 1029 .15 1 (2)
644 San Benito 410-14-004 6540 2245 .34 2 (3) 642 San Benito 410-14-003 6540· 2249 .34 2 (Proposed) (4) 640 San Benito 410-14-002 6649 1269 .19 1 (5) 630 San Benito 410-14-001 '6649
2245 .34 2 (6) 253 San Mateo 410-14-027 3640 852 .13 1 (7) 620 San Benito 410-14-026 2756 1732 .63 2 (8) 647 San Benito 410-13-018 6426 1825 .28 2 (9) 645 San Benito 410-13-019 .7384'·'
2136 .29 2 (10) 641 San Benito 410-13-020 6936 1110 .16 2 (11) 639 San Benito 410..13-021 13,020 2074 .16 2 (12) 635 San Benito 410-13-022 10,015 2931 .29 2 (13) 633 San Benito 410-13-023
10,850 6128 .56 2 & 631 San Benito (14) 629 San Benito 410-13-024 8160 2823 .35 2 (15) 615 San Benito 410-13-042 8712 3025 .35 2 --. ' .. (3 ..... 12 lKl 0 l'f..-i 1"3 8 L -......-l.
SAN BENI TO Av[ [b [3] @] 0 '. -' -,
...,'-". I.T .,"ii',';,} EXISTING PROPOSED REQUIREDI . CONDITIONS PROJECT
PERMITTED Zoning district ZI-D V -Land use S1= single family residence -General Plan Designation R6 Y-Le5 Qes Lot size (sq. ft.) h b. (1;"3£ 50DO minimum , , Exterior
materials: · siding S'TvcCO -• trim WOD/) Wao.o -• windows tva",&; J -· roofing y:'L4rr f ,c!Alr 17 -.. '.',
.. Building floor area: . • first floor qf)3 If 7'1 -• second floor .fCl -• garage Lfh::l I-fb:l -· cellar 9S.J fl.! -• basement .fJ' 73/-• accessory buildings -if -<i."'", "
.. 1< ' '. Setbacks (ft.): '<.' .> .,;...."...;,.,.', i; ," '. i.' "" .. < '; '."', · front d. /d. J minimum · rear 5"6 3 5* ;;to minimum • side 7 7 S' minimum • side street jLf
/'-f S-minimum Average slope (%) 3% 7/: .-Maximum height (ft.) /5" 2 7 3>" maximum Building coverage (%) so,:?% 40% maximum Floor Area Ratio (%) /)% , -· house 9',3 !t.t7c;
sq, ft maximum · garage 'fh 2 l.fC2 sq. ft. maximum Parking ,} SPA-CeS ,). s"o/;-c S' two spaces minimum Tree Removals ij 3:1 replacement/15-gal. Sewer or septic S £w£f{ Slw-in.
-N:IDEV\JudieITemplatesISFRdata-R-I-8.wpd Exhibit E
January 12, 2004 Ms. Judie Gilli Community Development Department Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street P.O. Box 949 Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: 642 San Benito Avenue Dear Judie: I visited
the site and reviewed the drawings submitted. While the proposed house addition will eliminate a currently deteriorated condition and will generally be in scale with many of the other
houses in the neighborhood, I did find this project relatively difficult to review because ofthe scale and character of the existing house on the site and the size ofthe addition relative
to that ofthe existing house as shown on the diagram and photograph below. Left side view View to addition and house to right The existing house is generally Spanish in style and very
small. While the front facade is currently largely obscured by overgrown landscaping, it is reasonable to assume that overall property improvements will result in greater visibility
of the house from San Benito Avenue in the future. Additions to a small house of some historic quality like this might normally take one of two general approaches: 1) Development of
an addition that is similar to the original house but articulated in plan and elevation to show a difference between the new ancl the old structures, or 2) Design of the addition in
a character which is different in style than the existing structure but with sufficient detail tc create a unified design fabric. The proposed design seems to be a mix of these two approaches,
and seems to result in a structure that overpowers the special qualities of the existing house on the site. Exhibit F
642 San Benito Avenue Design Review Comments January 12, 2004 Page 2 There is no easy solution to this issue. I will suggest a couple of approaches for staff consideration and discussion
with the applicant. The first would be to utilize building forms and detailing for the addition that are more in keeping with the existing house design. That would entail using flat
roofs with parapets, and preferably offsetting the new addition from the existing house to maintain its distinctive scale and character. The new addition would appear to have somewhat
less bulk since the visible roof structure would be eliminated. These general ideas are shown in the elevation diagrams below only as a conceptual approach -not as design recommendations.
Because the new addition will have a significant impact on the two story house immediately to its left (see photo to the right), the utilization of additional detail to set the addition
apart from the existing building and present a more pleasant face to the two story house immediately to the left of 642 San Benito is recommended. Elements that might be added are shown
on the two left side alternative elevations below. A combination ofthese elements should be considered if this approach is to be pursued. The added elements include: 1. Shutters House
to left 2. Pot shelfbalconies below windows. 3. Projecting trim as a transition from wall surface to soffit on second story walls 4. Exposed rafter tails 5. Projecting molding at the
rear bay window. Examples of a few of these elements are shown in the photographs on the following page. Approach #1 Front Elevation Conceptual only CANNON DllSHJN GROUP :..a·. tl. JI.d..·Ing
fot'.ms.. <S.'l.m.n.a.j" t() exIst/us $:lru¢tl.lfi): 'u'" :1.' . <!":', . adtilltbl1 " "< ..... '
i""--...,:AQO molding 'bc'low 'J)aywlndpw Approach #1 Left Side Elevation Conceptual only 180 HARBOR DRTVE.SUl'mZ19.SAUSAUTO,CNi·!()55
642 San Benito Avenue Design Review Comments January 12, 2004 Page 3 Balcony Examples Shutters and projecting rafter tail examples CANNON DKlilGN GROUP
642 San Benito Avenue Design Review Comments January 12, 2004 Page 4 The second approach suggested below would not be mt].ch of a departure from the currently proposed design, but would
add balcony and shutter elements to the addition to increase the visu.al interest of the facades -especially the side facing the house to the left which has second floor windows looking
out onto the site. These detail elements should also be used on other facades of the house for both this approach and approach 1.Add pl;a:nfi'nH ot balQordes ........' -.",.j., i ,:..
......... __ ... _.__ __..i 'I.-_....Add below hay \v1n(:iQlV Approach 2 with balconies added 1, .,.' iL
mo1t1ios . Approach 2 with balcony and shutters added . There are a couple
of other C(ll1cerns. The first is what seems to be an awkward relationship ofthe stair form to the proposed hip roofforms as noted in the diagram to the right. This concern would be
eliminated with the first approach outlined above since the roof forms would all be similar to that for the stair. If the hip roof approach is still pursued, some study shouldbe conducted
to better integrate the stair into the overall design. CANNON DESIGN CfRO'l))) .S:ta'ft:J'io.Qf19"1'm':seem;s ....
roq1'$
642 San Benito Avenue Design Review Comments January 12, 2004 Page 5 The second concern relates to the overhanging second floor element at the right rear of the house. The large arched
form, while in keeping with some of the arched forms on the existing building, seems rather too large and out of scale. The use of simple exposed beams would be consistent with the architectural
style or the arch could be divided up into smaller segments. These two approaches are shown in the diagrams below. Right side elevation For reference purposes, I've included photographs
below and on the next page of a few of the single family homes in the ne.ighborhood. CANNON DESIGN GROUP 180 HARBOR ProVE.SUITi 219 .,sAUSIlLITO .
642 San Benito Avenue Design Review Comments January 12, 2004 Page 6 Judie, please let me know if you have any questions or if there are other issues which need to be addressed. Sincerely,
CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry L. Cannon AIA AIOP President (:;i\NNQ}1 DESIGN GROlJP
04/23/2004 11:15 4083995753 LOS GATOS EHGINEERIt-..l PAGE 132 ApriJ ;20i 2004 Sunset West 1873 Orand Teton Dr. Milpitas, Ca. 95035 To: Ms. Judie Gilli Town ofLos Gatos 110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, Ca 95032 Property Address: 642 San Benito Dear Ms. auti, .. ,-' This letter is response to the architectural review ufthe above mentioned property that was performed by Cannon
Design Group and datoo 1/12/2004 Our original design was developed by fully cOoperati11g with the Historical Committee on . some 'VS1'Y specific design elements which are
in opposition to some ofthe -suggestions made by CPO .We have attempted to incorporate the ideas that the COO. has recommended without completely abandoning the progress that was made
by working with the :Historical Committee. • CDG recommended. that we develop theaddttiQ1\ tbatis similar to the original bouse but show a differeD.ce betweet:\ the old &: new structures.
We feel we have accomplished this with the two story addition that is set baok fron1 the the first story and has a different roof outline. . -COO also recommended we may incorporateC.scime:ofthe
following suggestions; shutters, pot shelves, projected trim. at areas, exposed rafter tails, and molding at rear bay. We have incorporated rafter tails a.1ld
the pot shelf at the rear ofthe home and could install some transition trim but the imd extensive trim details were consjde('ed aod rejected during the historical review
because they not in keeping with the original deslgT,\. . . ... ....'" -COG also suggested adjusting some of the windows locations, some issue with the stair . room roofbeing
awkward in relation to the hip roof of the SCCOtl.d story, and a false elliptical arch on the driveway side ofthe structure. Again these items m:re developed to this point after extensive
discussions with the Historical Committee on these exact, specific points so we don't should be incorporated. Exhibit G
04/23/2004 11:16 4083995753 LOS GATOS ENGINEERIN PAGE 03 In we feel that we have provided a oonsiderable effort in order to comply with the Historical �
� s very specific recommendations, and now have incorporated all the suggestions from CDG that we feel are not in direct conflict with the progress that was achieved by our efforts with
the Historical Their goa.l WS3S to try BM.d maintain the Qrigi);'lal desi,gn purpose ofthe original construction to keep that historic element intact and together
we think that was in a very successful manor. Tom. Schaub ': .... "." " .. : :. .-
July 8,2004 Tom Schaub 1873 Gran.d Teton Dr. Milpitas. Ca. 95035 To: Ms. Judie GilIi Tovm ofLos Gatos 11.0 E. Main Street Los Gatos, Ca 95032 Property Address: 642 San Benito Ave. Dear
Ms. Gilli, This letter is response to the appeal letter from the neighbors Harnish Fallside and Julie Livingston, and they reside at 644 San Benito Ave., directly adjacent to our property.
Point # 1. -stated that there was no efforts made by the planning staff to resolve the dispute between the homeowners of644 and us, the applicant. The truth is, Ms-Gilli attempted on
several occasions to have us accept a single story addition but we declined. Point # 2. -stated that the residents at 644 San Benito were not given adequate time to respond to the previous
reports, we have n.o knowledge either way regarding this point. Point # 3, .. stated the neighbors concerns regarding the previou,l;J shadow study that was provided at the planning commission
meeting. In response. our architect Allan Nikitin has performed a detailed shadow study with color graphs depicting how the proposed. addition will affect the home at 644 San Benito.
As you see on the graph, the shadowing from the addition. is very limited and is mostly late aftemoon and in the winter months. We also contracted with Akeena Solar to provide a detailed
sun path study that show the suns path and shadowing relating to the proposed addition and it's impact on the neighbors home. With this report., we know exactly which month and time
ofday that the south facing windows will lose direct sunlight as a result ofour proposed second story addition. This report was used to support the shadow study and will be available
at the Town Council meeting ifthere are any questions regarding these studies. In We feel that we have met all the zoning, setback, FAR, and height requirements imposed
on this proposed addition. We have complied with the recommendations from the Historical Committee, the Planning Department, the consulting architect. and the Planning Commission. Also
the existing neighborhood is predominately 2 story homes including the neighbor at 644 San Benitio. Although our remodeling project has been delayed for more than 8 months as a result
ofthis process, we recognize the value ofthis system and are now looking forward to the Town Councils decision to uphold the Planning Commission approval of this project. Attachment
6
----_.._-----_.--_.. ..., .-..... San Benito ...... Avenue . '. ' .. .-. . -. :" .. -" ... ". '.. ' ". ,t, ;
, '. ..\ . ., ,•••• : -. I" " .'. '. \'..... 'jo. 642 -_._. -,. ---••-----.------.....---•.-...-.----- ---._.,.... ---' ..
----.. -.--.. ---•.-.----.-.• -.....•--.. -.'--
-,i g l ...... ..', ,, •\v, ,'::) ":":'1 "c";'-i lit ..... ..j
) ,-, , . ..... ':'.;. , < +----f·... I: td·· /" . -l--f--\---;"--;....J, \:-( \ :> \ 'NOUYA313 'l1'rl/'ll T: -----_
.._----.•... .. _.. -_-_ ' -. '" .._--_.--.. . --._.._---._-.-_._-_._----..------.-. --._---I' ''!rJO? ....•.. {,.. ..-.
, , : Pi!-.= =-1.-r, \-.=:::....-._- J : I °.1 IT ;, If.i .._. i . . ..!t 1 !F 91 I 'I Ii II ; I i: Ii \:1 �
�
0fJ/'oVi3-.,1 :l;i 01 01 &'11Vr", 't.!HI C!;:JSQ,]oJd :;:l@v'-J300? -_..
'E.LL -J1:JOr-n CH) J:?i'5 <l1J lG I (rt) I<;;;L ..l-rJ3H3GV,3 (rl) 1OiOL. -;;1500/1500/4 (;;) 10-1 '0/4 01'J1-z. ,,/.ca:; :7.\017' 'l-(1:& .'@<?) r;r'ClT.I'V'1(,YV
> -z,"-l7 (1'1), .:;rWma1'rV t.''''i7.'Z > ".;bit.,;'-Z--9 rlll\'''1 '-1 t --,::::'
. \\ " \ i -Ii p' : , , " "101 do> i) !r;0;J\j ':?Iti S5tl'J?'·! 31od')(SlI"t,o<1 :t , �
� "Hd Y ).\fIV'<1 (\1>.1(] .>: . :J:lOrlA'lJ 1'?hl0'2....-Q.i. . 'l'll\'<hI9 '1.-'fVX{h:dJ
91 7'4..)1-1 IkJd\0 " '. -'Gff;f\ 3JU ..\1 w,u p/-:; III JII I
'... '. . ....• I /,:/0' ;':.' '" ".", 1.\? ........ o ..., r;,X i \ \ ....".:. >, .... .-. ;.... ... ::, ..: . -,i tri!j[ I I :I IIIIIl
J ROOF PLAN %' 'IB.l1:::: 1'0"' . ._._, . _ III II /1i 0111 ±::=.:::::;========----d ' 1 , /" (
.. .. .....,..._....·..
.-----..... ..-'''''''':' ..... _.. ..__,...' .,. " ...-.._-:._..,..,...-.,.__. ,__ ..._:-_ ..
Ow!!!!: A3 $«11. Benito· /k)enue LAO ..\ fl' rUBRA4Y II ! il'-i I '0 ._... -.---,-!I I I" o 18 FiRST FLOOR PLAN r--.,::r-t Ij �
�i I fP··: T1 ,... .'"1 ,J " ( I II . 1,1 -11' . PORCH 111
l.=-(j;. .._.__.. /\ ! ..---.--------..l\ i 'I If,I .__...\ q' 13X 'MEff' . t··· ..····· ..-... iIiIr-----.....__._._-_.--i.. I .
BR2 II X i"$i MBA 7.><" ,WALK-IN' SECOND FLOORPLAN I if,i1-_ --_.--.._._-j . i!it-._- ,II FLOOR PLANS . "":
:'" ' ... : ..',', ';.'." ':;'" .-. . ", ; . :." } .. I', ....... " ": ':. t·. s' .., .. I!:.-. L" ' . -. ''i-----:" •...,. •. _.,-' ..,. . ..., . __.....•.:Pc"'
..... J.....'.\-.: ii:FJ'A ..... ',' , , "':'-' .._'.-., .......... ',;' '-':;"-;'-, _....,...':.. . ,.. , : ::.•.r..... :n:.,'..
_' .• ....;.;: :::: '.....: . "",.".." New 9f1JtLO f11'l191 . 10 .f1Atql· Ai"'ISf\', E.:El If'�
� ....... ._-_.... ", '" \ ". ". : ....... REARELEV. IpWTIflIq "'... '/. ',':, " . .. . -. :-.(
.oj'" I. 1". __ ------.----tI r .... : t. . --:._- . ;. ,i .1I .jI .... -l-. IT-'-' -. +,.---L. --,., i 1-'--. ..
'":p'L:qJ. , I [, .:t:.: . i I L J_. o ,IIIII L -l ET +.. f9 ......... ,U., . (\,1 I! i t . I \ j .1IJt..J\ 1 . I I II . II r .J II ;' .f f J I 11 r 1-H . r r t'r----_:.-r--.-.----
-.--'-.-------'T-l ----;..---+--,...+_""-:"--....,.--. " . 't: ) jIlI
. ' ..... . ".':"" ........" :..-. ", : ...----::=-:: :-:;", ... --.T-"-;: .. .. -.. --.-.:-".-: "f.-'J '. :', r.-'·. .
"L'l.! . '" ., '-----r:'.'·;:, 1 ; . ! ' --r.t:;,,: ..-. . '". , ',r -
I '. A 1 i \ I \ . -I, '\,;' \ \ I I i \ /\ I I \ J -i \ I \ \\ I I , . . .L.. ----..,..i L_---WJ=j: -. -.. ---.-=t:$-----.-. I . i : I! i11! I .-....---..-----..------.--""l-+
r---.--....-..------.----------I '·1' III jII jI! iI .!iI I, e . . "--;-'--",' ---_..'.:-'-:-;"--..-:---::.-.. : . :'
Ir ji I, I JI' I . II' 'fW'li' "pop-"j I . i -'II I .'.1 !I' II 1 1, II H.,I,. dl I Xl • :. I,.. " • of. .• ''':. .,','" . . ,-.",' .. ·CC-·_·..,.-,,-:--·
--:-:c··:-.-·.--:,· ---. ---------------_. ------.. ,I . I ,:..LO· O.. 'R:" PLAN''". . . Ii I I I ! I iU �
� ... .:-t-="-...._..._:.. -." -.... -_.-...._-_.._... ..... ------.-------------------Fkr�
� LEFT"ELEV REAR El.EV ·Er,R,-""iV"NT. E"O-;''LE. V RfGHT'ELEV JII .. {