HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3.2TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS September 8, 2005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
RE: CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AND
VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE HOUSE AND PARKING TO ENCROACH
INTO THE FRONT AND SIDE SETBACKS; LANDS OF DIGIOVANNI AND
SANDER; 12380 HILLTOP DRIVE; #104-05-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR
FROM: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Senior Planner.,
APPROVED BY: Carl Cahill, Planning Director GG
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission:
Deny the requested Conditional Development Permit and variance based on the findings
in Attachment 1.
ALTERNATIVE
Offer the applicant the option to continue the project and return with a house plan that
conforms to the Town's setback requirements.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is a .49 acre parcel located on the south side of Hilltop Drive. The
lot was created as part of the Hillhaven subdivision in 1930, prior to the Town's
incorporation in 1956. The property is nearly flat with an average slope of 6.3% and a
LUF of 0.491. Because the existing single -story house was constructed in 1953, prior to
the establishment of the Town's zoning and site development guidelines, it is legal
nonconforming and encroaches up to 10' in the north and south property line setbacks.
On April 4, 1974, the Planning Commission approved a variance for a swimming pool to
encroach 15' into the side and rear yard setbacks. A search of Town records indicates
that except for the house, the circular driveway, and the swimming pool, all other existing
structures on the property including an addition to the main house, a guest house,
detached garage, pool cabana, and other hardscape improvements appear to have been
installed by the previous owner without benefit of Town approval.
The applicant is proposing to remove all the existing development on the property except
for the legal nonconforming swimming pool and construct a new two-story residence with
Staff Report to the Planning Conunission
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 2 of 7
an attached garage. The applicant is seeking approval of a variance to allow the new
residence and parking areas to encroach within the front and both side yard setbacks.
As required by Section 10-1.1104 of the Zoning Code, this application for a new
residence has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and approval. A
Conditional Development Permit is required any time a proposed project is located on a
property with a Lot Unit Factor (LUF) of 0.50 or less.
Pursuant to Section 10-1.1107(3) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission, in
reviewing a Conditional Development Permit application, determines whether the
proposed development meet the objectives and standards of the Town. The evaluation of
the Conditional Development Permit should include consideration of the size and design
of the project with respect to the size, shape and topography of the site. CDP lots are not
automatically entitled to MDA and MFA numbers and may be subject to conditions that
include reductions to the allowable MDA and MFA. (LAFIMC 10-1.1107(3).b)
In addition, the Zoning and Site Development sections of the Municipal Code are used to
evaluate the proposal including building siting, floor and development area limitations,
grading, drainage, height, setbacks, visibility, and parking requirements.
The evaluation of the proposed variance should include many of the same items,
concurrently evaluating the physical site conditions which result in an undue hardship on
the property. Recommended findings for the Conditional Development Permit and
Variance are included in this staff report. (Attachments #1 and #2)
DISCUSSION
Site Data: Gross Lot Area: 0.491 acres
Net Lot Area: 0.491 acres
Average Slope: 6.3%
Lot Unit Factor. 0.491
Floor Area and Development Area:
Area (sq. ft.)
Maximum
Existing
Existing
Existing
Proposed
Remaining
Total
with Permit
without Permit
Development
7,010
13,166*
5,835
7,331
7,004
6
Floor
4,910
3,692*
1,976
1,716
4,647
263
* Includes Development and Floor Areas installed without permits by previous owner
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 3 of 7
Site and Architecture
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Development Permit and variance
for a 4,647 sq. ft. two-story residence with an attached garage. The new residence will be
located within the approximate footprint of the existing house. The first floor of the new
residence has 3,675 sq. ft. of floor area and contains a foyer, living room, family room,
dining room, kitchen, two bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a two -car garage. The second
floor has 972 sq. ft. of living area and includes two bedrooms, two bathrooms, and an
office. Proposed exterior materials include painted stucco, wood windows, and mission
tile roof. Solar panels will be installed on the roof as an energy saving measure for the home.
The proposed building meets the height, floor area and development area requirements
established in Title 10, Zoning and Site Development, of the Los Altos Hills Municipal
Code. The maximum building height on a vertical plane and the overall building height
is 27'. The upper floor will be located a minimum of 40' from the front and 30' from the
side property lines. However, 1,251 sq. ft. of floor area on the lower floor will encroach
within the east and west setbacks by up to 10'.
Driveway & Parking
The existing circular driveway will be removed and replaced with a new 14' wide driveway.
All proposed parking spaces have standard dimensions of 10' x 20'. Two of the four
required parking spaces are provided in the garage. Two additional outdoor parking spaces are
located in front of the new house and encroach up to 26' in the front and side yard setbacks.
Variances
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow portions of the garage, kitchen, family
room, and bedrooms to encroach up to 10 feet in east and west (side) setbacks. In
addition, a variance is required for two outdoor parking spaces in the north and west
(front and side) setbacks. Staff has reviewed the proposal and does not find substantial
evidence to support the necessary findings to recommend approval of the variance.
Building Setback Variance: Strict application of the setback requirements would not
deprive the applicant from constructing a 4,647 sq. ft. new residence on the property. Not
being granted the privilege to build a new home within the setbacks would not constitute
denial of reasonable use of the property because it is possible to design the new residence
to meet the minimum setback requirements. The applicant already enjoys the benefit of a
Town approved variance allowing the swimming pool in the setback which further
increases the available building area outside the setbacks to accommodate the additional
floor area of the new residence.
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 4 of 7
In the past, variances have not been granted when grounds for an exceptional or
extraordinary circumstances (Finding #1) is solely based on substandard lot area. Most
recently, on January 27, 2005, the Planning Commission denied a variance request for
building setbacks on a CDP lot by finding that a substandard lot is not necessarily a
hardship and approving the setback variance would set a precedent. (Lands of Eshghi and
Doroodian, #168-04-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR, 1/27/05) A comparison of the two lots indicates
that they are similar in size, shape, and topography.
Lot Size
0.491 ac.
0.455 ac.
Average Slope
6.3%
3.8%
LUF
0.491
0.455
Lot Dimensions
107' x 200'
122'x 145'
Building Area Outside Setbacks
47' x 130' / 6,110 sq. ft.
52' x 85'/ 4,420 sq. ft.
MFA
4,910 sq. ft.
4,550 sq. ft.
MDA
7,010 sq. ft.
6,647 sq. ft.
Proposed FA
4,647 sq. ft.
4,323 sq. ft.
Proposed DA
7,004 sq. ft.
6,400 sq. ft.
FA in Setback
1,251 sq. ft. (prop.)
0 sq. ft. (approved 4/14/05)
DA in Setback
2,061 sq. ft. (existing and prop.)
582 sq. ft. (approved 4/14/05)
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 5 of 7
Except for the size and dimensions of the lot, no exceptional circumstances or conditions
are present at the subject site which do not apply generally to other properties in the
neighborhood. The subject parcel is a flat, rectangular shaped, substandard sized lot.
There are a total of five (5) CDP lots within the subdivision along Hilltop Drive that has
similar lot dimensions and characteristics. None has unique characteristics or topographic
features such as steep slopes, unusual lot shape, or creeks which present development
constraints that necessitate a variance. In addition, at least seventy (70) CDP lots
constrained by substandard lot size (0.5 acre or less) are located within the Town.
Q
�va�—avowRHLL
........ ".. �, w s t
W
Q
wu
Protect $Ito
Q Similar properties along Hilltop Drive
Granting a variance for building setback on a flat, rectangular lot with no other topographic
constraints would set a precedent and opens the possibility of future requests to allow
reduced structure setbacks based solely on substandard lot sizes.
Parking Setback Variance: Variances for surface parking areas on CDP lots have been
granted by the Commission in the past (Lands of Unlu, #224-04-ZP-SD-GD-VAR-CDP,
3/10/05; Lands of Eshghi and Doroodian, #168-04-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR, 4/14/05). While a
setback for surface parking areas may be warranted in this case, it is recommended that
the surface parking area be located a minimum of 5' from the property line to allow for
adequate landscape screening between the properties.
Neighbor Comments
The applicant has submitted a letter signed by owners of thirteen (13) neighboring
properties supporting the project. (Attachment 8) The neighbor across the street at 12401
Hilltop Drive has also submitted a letter of support. (Attachment 9)
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 6 of 7
As discussed above, staff was not able to determine that an exceptional or extraordinary
circumstance is applicable to this property. Furthermore, it should be noted that approval
of this variance would set a precedent for utilizing substandard lot size or width as
grounds for satisfying the finding for undue hardship in granting setback reductions.
Therefore, staff is not able to make the required Findings for approving the project as
proposed and recommends denial of the Conditional Development Permit and variance.
Draft Findings of approval for the Conditional Development Permit and variance
provided by the applicant is included as Attachments 5 and 6.
Outdoor Lighting
The applicants are proposing twelve (12) exterior lights on the new residence. The
proposed light fixtures have frosted glass cover to minimize glare and ensure that the
source of the lighting is not directly visible from off-site.
Trees & Landscaping
The existing landscaping on the property consists of various trees and shrubs lining the
east and west property lines. No heritage oak tree was identified on the property. The
rest of the site is sparsely planted with several trees and ornamental plantings around the
house. One 8" tree will be removed as part of this site development proposal. All
existing perimeter landscaping will be preserved and the owner has indicated that at least
six new fruit trees will be planted on the east and west side of the new residence to help
mitigate the view of the structure from neighbors' views.
Grading and Drainage
The project involves minimal grading (less than 50 cubic yards) which will be exported
from the site. Pursuant to Section 10-2.503, Drainage Facilities Standards, of the
Municipal Code, the Engineering Department has reviewed and determined that the
proposed drainage design complies with Town requirements.
Fire Department Review
The Santa Clam County Fire Department is requiring the construction of a standard 14'
wide access driveway.
Committee Review
The Pathways Committee recommends a pathways in -lieu fee
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 7 of 7
The Environmental Design Committee has commented that mitigation will be required
between the homes. In addition, the pool equipment will have to be enclosed.
CEOA STATUS
The project is categorically exempt under Class 1 of the State CEQA Guidelines
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings for denial of the Variance
2. Findings for denial of the Conditional Development Permit
3. Site Map
4. worksheet k2
5. Findings for approval of the Variance prepared by the applicant dated August 12, 2005
6. Findings for approval of the Conditional Development Permit prepared by the
applicant dated August 12, 2005
7. Recommended project conditions if variance is approved
8. Letter and signatures of neighbors within 500' of property dated May 3, 2005
9. Letter from neighbors at 12401 Hilltop Drive dated August 22, 2005
10. Recommendations from Environmental Design Committee dated June 15, 2005
11. Recommendations from Santa Clara County Fire Department dated June 9, 2005
12. Recommendations from Pathways Committee dated June 27, 2005
13. Development plans: site, topographic, grading & drainage, floor, elevation, section,
roof, and lighting plans
cc: Fiona Sander and Joe Digiovanni
12380 Hilltop Drive
Los Altos Hills, CA 94024
ATTACHMENT I
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF VARIANCE TO ALLOW
BUILDING ENCROACHMENT IN THE SIDE SETBACKS
LANDS OF DIGIOVANNI AND SANDER, 12380 HILLTOP DRIVE
File # 104-05-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR
1. Because of exceptional and extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject
property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict
application of the provisions of this Title is found to deprive such property of
privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning
classification.
The strict application of the Zoning Code does not preclude the applicant from
constructing a new residence on this property. There is adequate space on the
property to construct the new residence entirely outside the required setbacks. In
fact, the applicant already enjoys the benefit of a Town approved variance that
allows the pool to encroach within the side and rear setback thus further increasing
the available building area for the house outside the setbacks. Therefore, the
property owners are not deprived of privileges for the reasonable use of the land
because it is possible to construct a new residence of the same square footage on the
property which would comply with the Town's setback requirements. In addition,
this property is not unique in that four (4) other properties with similar size and
characteristics are located in the immediate vicinity within the neighborhood and at
least seventy (70) CDP lots constrained by substandard lot size are located within
the Town.
2. Upon the granting of the variance, the intent and purpose of the applicable sections
of the Zoning Ordinance will still be served and the recipient of the variance will not
be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding property owners.
The granting of the variance would allow the applicant to enjoy a special privilege
not enjoyed by other surrounding property owners. All residential parcels in Town
are subject to the same Zoning and Site Development standards, including
restrictions regarding development in setbacks. Granting of this variance would
allow the applicant to enjoy the benefit of constructing their house in a setback area,
a special privilege that other surrounding property owners do not have.
The granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to the property, improvements or uses within the immediate
vicinity and within the same zoning district.
Variance Findings
Lands of DiGlovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 2 of 2
The granting of a variance will be in conflict with the general purposes and intent
of the Zoning Code to maintain adequate open space between properties and to
preserve the Town's rural appearance. Furthermore, the granting of a variance for
building setback on a flat, rectangular lot with no other topographic constraints
would set a precedent and opens the possibility of future requests to allow reduced
setbacks based solely on substandard lot sizes.
4. The variance will not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly
authorized by the Zoning District regulations governing the parcel of property.
The granting of the variance would authorize a use in a setback area that is not
expressly authorized by the Town's Zoning Code. The intent of setbacks is to
provide a buffer area between developed residential properties and streets.
Allowable structure types are limited to 6' fences and minor ornamental garden
structures less than 6' tall. Locating the home within the setbacks would reduce the
open space area between properties and is not consistent with the low-density
residential zoning designation of the property and surrounding properties.
ATTACHMENT 2
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF A CONDITIONAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE
LANDS OF DIGIOVANNI AND SANDER, 12380 HILLTOP DRIVE
File # 104-05-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR
1. The site for the proposed development is adequate in size, shape and topography
to accommodate the proposed intensity of development, including all structures,
yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping, walls and fences and other such
features as may be require by this chapter.
The new residence has been designed to comply with the floor area, development
area, and building height limits. However, portions of the new residence and
proposed outdoor parking spaces are located in the setback and require a variance.
2. The size and design of the proposed structures create a proper balance, unity
and harmonious appearance in relation to the size, shape and topography of the
site and in relation to the surrounding neighborhood.
The applicant is proposing to remove all un -permitted structures installed by the
previous owner and reduce the excessive development area to below the MDA.
However, the new residence has been designed to encroach 10' within the
required setbacks. The reduced setback will lessen the open space between the
homes and affect the rural character of the site and the neighborhood.
3. The rural character of the site has been preserved as much as feasible by
minimizing vegetation and tree removal, excessive and unsightly grading and
alteration of natural land forms.
There is minimal vegetation on the property except for a few trees and some
perimeter shrubs along the east and west property lines. There will be minimal
grading because the site is essentially flat.
4. The proposed development is in compliance with all regulations and polices set
forth in the Site Development Ordinance.
The proposed new residence does not meet the setback requirements established
in the Town's Zoning and Site Development Code and staff is unable to make the
required findings to allow the variance.
/f ATTACHMENT 3
en y
M
---VN31V09VW to
T,�t—•3nv— ..att �1a m
� II Ir0 • �a�14G \6 m'fr
N 1 nR m•� n .. O.bn� ��.
W N O \ 6t'att d
¢ SAW=s m
le W W
•F � i � PI J � p, O \�~�\`
CIL
r
••
g
oa
' - n
Nd
ly
CL
J
�2
c CS
W
D
� U
v
cn
EN
C LO
0
I------mat-----
OO
'�—=—
•c
--•'4tRt
0
N
C
C
J
/f ATTACHMENT 3
en y
M
---VN31V09VW to
T,�t—•3nv— ..att �1a m
� II Ir0 • �a�14G \6 m'fr
N 1 nR m•� n .. O.bn� ��.
W N O \ 6t'att d
¢ SAW=s m
le W W
•F � i � PI J � p, O \�~�\`
J '
W Ea J w
s �
m N ry S
t r `I NJ `1
0 f—_• I
f d01'f11H =n -
••
g
4NL'l
-9[aLS
' - n
Q
ly
J
MZ'
J
� U
I------mat-----
'�—=—
--•'4tRt
-------------
J '
W Ea J w
s �
m N ry S
t r `I NJ `1
0 f—_• I
f d01'f11H =n -
g
A
w-
--•'4tRt
-------------
%t
B
----
co
NJ
•O
-
RR
L
{
J '
W Ea J w
s �
m N ry S
t r `I NJ `1
0 f—_• I
f d01'f11H =n -
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS ATTACHMENT Al
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
26379 Fmmont Road • Los Altos Hills, California 94022 • (650) 941-7222 • FAX (650) 941-3160
WORKSHEET #2
EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA
• TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION
PROPERTY OWNERS NAME Fiono, + 'Soe D*,g;0vann'1
PROPERTY ADDRESS 12.3 80 H', 11 +o a Or t ve
CALCULATED BY Font, 0;3. DATE 12- Avfn OS
1.
DEVELOPMENT AREA
Existing
Proposed
Total
(SQUARE FOOTAGE)
(Addidon&0cleaons)
A.
House and Garage (from Pan 3. A.)
2(o33
+4641,-2633
464-1
B.
Decking
0
0/0
0
C.
Driveway and Parking
(Measured 100' along centerline)
4fi8
4(200/-,1988
1200
D.
Patios and Walkways
3469
+1401-3469
140
E.
Tennis Court
O
0/0
O
F.
Pool and Decking
1 01-7
0/0
10 1-7
G.
Accessory Buildings (from Pan B)
1 0 5 9
o�-10S 9
0
H.
Any other coverage
O
O/o
O
TOTALS
13 1 610
-rot 6 2
7 00 t4
Maximum Development Area Allowed - MDA (from Worksheet #1)
7 O I O sqF+
2.
TOTAL R"ERVIOUS SURFACE
Existing
Proposed
Total
(SQUARE FOOTAGE)
TOTALS
3.
FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE)
Existing
Proposed
Total
(Addition leuons)
A.
House and Garage
a. 1st Floor
2(033
+2. (o roli2(033
7(p(01
b. 2nd Floor
0
+R -7Z /0
91 2
c. Atticand Basement
O
0/0
0
d. Garage
0
+1014 /O
101,-1
B. Accessory Buildings
a. 1st Floor IOS9 O
b. 2nd Floor 0 0/0 0
c. Attic and Basement O 0/0 0
TOTALS 3692 +3$=`155 `(64'7
Maximum Floor Area Allowed- MFA(from Worksheet#1) 4910 sy{+
TOWNUSEONLY CHECKEDDBY I DATE
Rev. 3/M2 Page 1 of 1 Townof Los Altos Hills
RECEIVED
VARIANCE FINDINGS AUG 2 4 2(fTAC
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
1. Because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property, Including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the ordinance is found in deprive
the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning
classifications:
a. Narrow Allowable Footprint: The extraordinary circumstances of our property relate mostly to its size: it
is a''/z acre parcel, while 29 of the 31 properties within a 500ft radius are 1 acre or more. Our 10711
frontage, combined with 3011 side setbacks, leaves only 4711 in width for our front elevation; essentially
constraining us into building an unsightly 2 story "shoebox". Omer [larger] properties are less constrained
in their allowable development footprints and can enjoy more freedom in designing their home. So strict
application of the ordinance would constrain us into building a less than desirable structure for those living
inside, and it would also not be consistent with the adjoining home styles on Hilltop Drive and generally
the rest of the homes in rural Los Altos Hills. So in not granting us the Variance, we would be deprived of
design privileges other [larger -sized] nearby properties =der identical zoning classifications already enjoy.
b. Equivalent Neighbor Setbacks: The parcels immediately adjoining our property, 12370 & 12390 Hilltop
Drive, are very similar to ours in both size and shape, and both the homes on each already encroach on their
respective side setbacks as well: the home at 12370 Hilltop Dr =joys a —1011 setback (much more than the
30ft required setback or the 20ft setbacks we are asking for), and the home at 12390 Hilltop Dr enjoys a
—2011 setback. Therefore, in not granting us this Variance, we would be deprived of side setback privileges
other id=tically-sized properties in the vicinity under identical zoning classifications already enjoy.
c. Inflexible Boundaries: Since the parcel adjoining ours to the North, 12390 Hilltop Dr, is located on the
corner of Hilltop Dr & Hillview Dr, they have the option of facing the house front to Hillview Dr. This
affords this similarly sized property the option of more pleasing front elevation design. Since our property
boundaries cannot accommodate this design flexibility, we are deprived of design option privileges other
identically -sized properties in the vicinity under identical zoning classifications already enjoy.
d. Tree Preservation: Since the property was developed in the 1950's, most of it already has very mature
landscaping: 12 large &small trees (ranging from 4in to 44in in diameter), many bushes, plants and flowers.
The proposed development takes this natural state into account by erecting the structure such that a
minimum of the existing landscaping is altered. A structure not requiring a side setback variance and built
not to alter existing landscaping — specifically such that the 2 backyard trees and the 1 front yard tree (see
Pictures 1, 2 & 3) are not be destroyed — would necessitate an awkwardly -shaped home at both the back &
front elevations. Therefore, the desire to minimize disruption to the existing topography deprives our
property of available footprint privileges others in the area can enjoy.
2. That upon granting of the Variance, the intent & purpose of the ordinance will still be served and the
recipient of the Variance will not be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding
property owners:
a. The intent of the ordinance is to permit reasonable development of land while preserving the natural scenic
character of the town, protecting the natural amenities and providing for the safety, benefit and welfare of
its citizens by establishing minimum standards and requirements. Our proposed development would
remain true to the rural residential character of the community by not compromising: 1) land grading, 2)
drainage & erosion control, 3) siting of buildings, 4) planting of landscaping, 5) installation of driveways,
6) preservation of ridgelines, 7) Master Path Plan implementation and 8) outdoor lighting. Therefore, since
our proposed development actually supports & even enhances these same principles, granting of the
Variance to us would still serve the intent & purpose of the ordinance.
b. As already stated above, granting of the Variance would not allow us to enjoy any privileges not already
enjoyed by the properties in the vicinity that are either larger in size or even the same in size: those larger
properties already enjoy the freedom to design a home with a pleasing footprint (from both outside & inside
perspectives), and those smaller in size (the two directly adjacent properties) already each enjoy side
setbacks of at least the same as our request or even more. Moreover, these neighboring properties could
12380 Hilltop Drive Page I of 2
MR :I KION Dow 10111 10C
12 Aug 05
enjoy more design freedom in general: ie changing front elevation direction, or having a less constrained
footprint due to less on-site mature landscaping.
3. That granting the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious; to the
property, improvements or uses within the immediate vicinity and within the same zoning district:
a. The existing structure has been encroaching on the side setbacks by the exact amount we are proposing for
over 50 years now; in fact, the home was built to these side setbacks in 1953, prior to the town's 1956
incorporation date. Since the public welfare has not been damaged during this time, and since the property,
improvements or uses within the vicinity have not been injured as a result of this encroachment during this
time as well, it is reasonable to assert that granting of the Variance for this same encroachment would not
be injurious in the future as well.
b. Granting of this variance will allow the home to be designed such that the 2' floor has no side -facing
windows - on either side. This will not only not be detrimental to public welfare, it will enhance it by
providing substantial neighbor privacy.
4. That the Variance will not allow a use or activity which is not expressly authorized by the Zoning
Ordinance:
The Zoning ordinance was adopted to protect and guide the growth and expansion of the Town in an orderly
manna true to the rural residential character of the community. Granting of this Variance will not only not
allow us a use or activity which is not expressly authorized by this ordinance, it will actually better allow us to
keep our proposed development more consistent with the spirit of the ordinance: to stay Ince m the rural
residential character of the Los Altos Hills community.
12380 Hilltop Drive Page 2 of 2
RECEIVED
CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PERMTT AUG 2 4 2X"ACFJMtTy 1
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
1. The site for the proposed development is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate the
proposed intensity of development, including all structures, yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping,
walls At fences and other such features as may be required by this chapter.
Based on the topography (.49 LUF) and size (21408sgft) of our property, we have a MFA of 4910sgft and a
MDA of 7010sgft; our proposed home has a FA of4647sgft and a DA of 7004sgft — within both of these limits
At a max peak height of 2711, our home complies with the 27ft roof maximum height limit. We have provided
not only 2 covered and 2 uncovered parking spaced as required, we have provided 2 additional covered spaces.
Most all of the already present mature landscaping and trees (11 of 12) will remain and even be augmented with
more vegetation. Weare also over -complying with both the front and rem setback guidelines: 1) our I" floor is
50ft from the front property line, and our 2°d floor is 76ft from the front property line (40ft is required), and 2)
our 10 floor is 72ft from the rear property line, and our 2°d floor is 103 ft horn the rear property line (30ft is
required). Note: nor 2°d floor is 30ft from the side property lines (30ft is required).
2. The size At design of the proposed structures create a proper balance, unity and harmoniom appearance
in relation to the size, shape and topography of the site and in relation to the surrounding neighborhood.
94% of the surrom ling neighborhood (defined by a 500ft radius) are IAc parcels or greater, and the homes are
appropriately larger in size. The majority of the homes have 2 stories, and many have been remodeled or even
rebuilt Our proposed home would be well within the range of homes just described in terms of both size and
height, if not even more modest. Therefore, the size & design of our proposed development would create that
proper balance, unity and harmonious appearance in relation to the size, shape & topography of our site as well
as in relation to the surrounding neighborhood.
3. The rural character of the site has been preserved as much as feasible by minimizing vegetation & tree
removal, excessive & unsightly grading and alteration of natural land forms.
The rural character of the site in terms of vegetation and tree removal has not only been preserved by our
proposed development, it will be substantially enhanced relative to the development currently occupying the
site: 686sgft of non -permitted & non -conforming FA, and 6162sgft of non -permitted DA will be removed. This
area will then be populated with trees and vegetation. Also, 11 of the 12 mature trees on the property will be
retained, and at least 6 fruit -bearing trees will be planted new. As much of the general existing backyard and
front yard vegetation will be retained in the proposed development as well.
There will be no excessive grading or alteration of natural land forms, in fact, our proposed development will
not alter any of the existing land formations already in place as the site plan clearly shows our desire to
essentially stay within the footprint of the existing structure. Therefore, the coal character of the site will be
preserved by not only minimizing, but by eliminating excessive & unsightly grading and alteration of land forms.
4. The proposed development is in compliance with all the regulations and policies set forth in the Site
Development Ordinance.
Our proposed development substantially complies with all the regulations & policies set forth in the Site
Development Ordinance, as well as with the purpose of the Ordinance itself to permit reasonable development
of land while preserving the natural scenic character of the town, protecting the natural amenities, and providing
for the safety, benefit and welfare of its citizens. Our proposed development accomplishes this by
1) minimizing property disruption by retaining much of the existing footprint so that 11 of the 12 mature trees,
especially the 3 within the allowable development footprint, on the property are retained, and almost no
new grading is required,
2) enhancing water drainage & combating street erosion by removal of 47% of hard-scape and installation of
swale system dissipating the water on-site 30fl from property line,
12380 Hilltop Drive Page 1 of 2
CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
12 Aug 05
3) maintaining consistency with the existing homes in the area by creating a pleasing front elevation (vs a
possible'shoebox' structure),
4) reducing setback -specific area 'bulk' by removal of 83% of development area (excluding floor area) in the
setback, and removal of 35% of floor area in the setback
5) reducing overall floor area 'bulk'by eliminating all extraneous structures (all located in side & rear
setbacks): cottage, front shed, rear shed, barbecue/bar & gazebo,
6) exhibiting appropriate sensitivity to a sub -standard lot by requesting no more than the allowed MFA, MDA,
front setback rear setback or height limits,
7) positively offsetting the side setback request by proposing a 50ft front setback (vs the allowed 40ft) and a
72ft rear setback (vs the allowed 3011),
8) increasing the existing'effective' side setback from 16.511 to 20ft by removing the supported 3.511 eaves
currently protruding into the 20ft side setbacks,
9) removing unsightly street/driveway parking of vehicles by creating 4 covered parking spaces via a 4 -car
garage & 2 uncovered spaces,
10) providing a 76% reduction in driveway area by replacing the existing 4988sgft driveway with a 1200sgft
driveway,
11) enhancing landscaping by planting at least 6 new fruit trees as neighbor privacy screening,
12) incorporating clean energy principles by inclusion of solar power, and
13) demonstrating environmental consciousness by using salvaged clay roof tiles typically lasting a lifetime.
This proposed development is clearly reasonable for the site, preserves the rural character of the surrounding
neighborhood, protects the natural amenities and provides safety & benefit for those living within the structure
as well as those living outside of it. Due to constrained nature of our site (narrow in overall width and small in
overall size), we ask only for a side setback variance of no more than what the existing structure already
occupies: 20fi.
12380 Hilltop Drive Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT7
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR A CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE
LANDS OF DIGIOVANNI AND SANDER, 12380 HILLTOP DRIVE
File # 104-05-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR
A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
1. No other modifications to the approved plans are allowed except as
otherwise first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or the
Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the changes.
2. After completion of rough framing and prior to the time of the pre -
rough framing inspection by the Planning and Engineering
Departments, the applicant shall submit a landscape screening and
erosion control plan for review by the Site Development Committee.
Particular attention shall be given to plantings which will be adequate to
break up the view of the new residence from surrounding properties and
streets. Particular attention shall be paid to landscaping that will help
break up the view of the house from the adjacent properties with the
reduced setbacks. All landscaping required for screening purposes and
for erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer) must be
installed prior to final inspection of the new residence.
3. A landscape maintenance deposit (or certificate of deposit) in the amount
of $5,000 shall be posted prior to final inspection. An inspection of the
landscape to ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be
made two years after the installation. The deposit will be released at that
time if the plantings remain viable.
4. Prior to beginning any grading operation, all significant trees are to be
fenced at the drip line. The fencing shall be of a material and structure
(chain-link) to clearly delineate the drip line. Town staff must inspect the
fencing and the trees to be fenced prior to commencement of grading. The
property owner shall call for said inspection at least three days in advance
of the inspection. The fencing must remain throughout the course of
construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris shall be allowed
within the drip lines of these trees. Existing perimeter plantings shall be
fenced and retained throughout the entire construction period.
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 2 of 5
5. Prior to requesting the foundation inspection, a registered civil
engineer or licensed land surveyor shall certify in writing and state that
"the location of the new residence and roof eaves are no less than 40'
from the front property line and 30' from the side and rear property
lines." The elevation of the new residence shall be similarly certified in
writing to state that "the elevation of the new residence matches the
elevation and location shown on the Site Development plan" The
applicant shall submit the stamped and signed letter(s) to the
Planning Department prior to requesting a foundation inspection.
6. Prior to requesting the final framing inspection, a registered civil
engineer or licensed land surveyor shall certify in writing and state that
"the height of the new residence complies with the 27'-0" maximum
structure height, measured as the vertical distance at any point from the
bottom of the crawl space or basement ceiling if excavated below natural
grade, to the highest part of the structure directly above (including roof
materials)." The overall structure height shall be similarly certified in
writing and state that "all points of the building (including chimneys and
appurtenances) lie within a thirty-five (35') foot horizontal band based,
measured from the lowest visible natural or finished grade topographical
elevation of the structure along the building line and the highest
topographical elevation of the roof of the structure." The applicant shall
submit the stamped and signed letter(s) to the Planning Department
prior to requesting a final framing inspection.
7. Outdoor lighting is approved as shown on the approved plans. No lighting
may be placed within setbacks except two entry or driveway lights.
Lighting shall be down shielded, low wattage, shall not encroach or reflect
on adjacent properties, and the source of the lighting shall not be visible
from off the site. Any additional outdoor lighting shall be approved by the
Planning Department prior to installation.
8. Fire retardant roofing (Class A or alternate if approved by the Building
Official) is required for all new construction.
9. Skylights, if utilized, shall be designed and constructed to reduce emitted
light (tinted or colored glass, or other material). No lighting may be placed
within skylight wells.
10. No new fencing or gates are approved. Any new fencing or gates shall
require review and approval by the Planning Department prior to
installation.
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 3 of 5
11. All properties must pay School District fees to either the Los Altos School
District or the Palo Alto Unified School District, as applicable, before
receiving their building permit from Los Altos Hills. The applicant
must take a copy of Worksheet #2 to school district offices (both the
elementary and high school offices in the Los Altos School District), pay
the appropriate fees and provide the Town with a copy of their receipts.
B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
12. Two sets of a final grading and drainage plan shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance
of plans for building plan check. The final grading and drainage plans
must show a back flow prevention device for the sewer lateral since the
finish floor elevation is lower than the upstream sanitary sewer
manhole's rim elevation. Final drainage and grading shall be inspected by
the Engineering Department and any deficiencies corrected to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. A
letter shall be submitted from the project engineer stating that the grading
and drainage improvements were installed as shown on the approved plans
prior to final inspection.
13. Any, and all, changes to the approved grading and drainage plan shall be
submitted as revisions from the project engineer and shall first be
approved by the Town Engineering Department. No grading shall take
place during the grading moratorium (November 1 to April 1) except with
prior approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within
ten feet of any property line except to allow for the construction of the
driveway access.
14. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed
underground.
15. Two copies of an erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance
of plans for building plan check. The contractor and the property owner
shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES
permit relative to grading and erosion/sediment control. The first 100 feet
of the driveway shall be rocked during construction and all cut and fill
slopes shall be protected from erosion. All areas on the site that have the
native soil disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy
season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection.
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 4 of 5
16. Two copies of a grading and construction operation plan shall be
submitted by the property owner for review and approval by the City
Engineer and Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for building
plan check. The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck
traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic
safety on Hilltop Drive and surrounding roadways, storage of construction
materials, placement of sanitary facilities, parking for construction
vehicles, clean-up area, and parking for construction personnel. A debris
box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction
debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage
Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town
and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits.
17. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair
any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private
driveways, and public and private roadways, prior to final inspection and
release of occupancy permits and shall provide the Town with
photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior
to acceptance of plans for building plan check
18. The driveway shall be required to be fully constructed and to be
roughened where the pathway intersects, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, prior to final inspection.
19. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary
sewer prior to final inspection. An encroachment pemtit shall be required
by the Town's Public Works Department for all work proposed within the
public right of way prior to start work. A copy of a permit from the City
of Los Altos shall be required to be submitted to the Town prior to
submittal of plans for building plan check.
20. The property owner shall pay a pathway fee of $46.00 per linear foot of
the average width of the property prior to acceptance of plans for building
plan check.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT:
21. The applicant shall provide an access driveway with a paved all weather
surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 14', vertical clearance of 13'6",
minimum circulating turning radius of 36' outside and 23' inside, and a
maximum slope of 15%.
Lands of Digiovanni and Sander
12380 Hilltop Drive
September 8, 2005
Page 5 of 5
CONDITION NUMBERS 12, 15, 16, 17 AND 20 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND
SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE CITY ENGINEER
PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK
BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
Project approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 23 days of the date of this
notice. The building permit cannot be issued until the appeal period has lapsed. The
applicant may submit construction plans to the Building Department after October 1,
2005, provided the applicant has completed all conditions of approval required prior to
acceptance of plans for building plan check.
Upon completion of the construction, a final inspection shall be required to be set with
the Planning and Engineering Departments two weeks prior to final building inspection
approval.
NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until
September 8, 2006). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and
work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and
completed within two years.
3 May 05
Dear Planning Commission,
RECEIVED
ATTACHMEKj �4 2005
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
We, the neighbors within a 500ft radius of the Digiovanni Property at 12380 Hilltop Drive, hereby state
our support of the design proposed for that property.
The Digiovanni's have showed us their plans for a—4,700sgft house requiring—7,000sgft of development
area and a 20ft 1" floor side setback variance on their substandard lot. We appreciate their efforts in
creating the design as outlined in the'Site Development Summary', and we welcome their desire to
minimize the impact their proposed development would have on the privacy of their 2 next door
neighbors.
We understand that the neighboring property to the South also already enjoys a 20ft side setback, and
that the neighboring property to the North enjoys a loft side setback. We also understand that the
Digiovanni property has had 20ft side setbacks since the early 1950's — prior even to the incorporation of
Los Altos Hills as a town — and since these setbacks have not been an issue during the last 50yrs, we
don't anticipate an issue going forward.
The Digiovanni s are long-time LA/LAH residents (56 combined years), with one of them even having
spent several years growing up on this very street They are active in the community and have much of
their family still in the area. We therefore believe them to truly have the spirit of our town in the vision
of their home.
Finally, we believe that strict adherence to the setback ordinances for this particular substandard property
would necessitate a bulky structure completely inconsistent with the rural Los Altos Hills character; not to
mention a structure especially unpleasing to the neighborhood `eye'. So as their neighbors, not only do
we support the Digiovanni plans for site development of their property, we prefer it Therefore, we hope
the Planning Commission approves the site development plans for 12380 Hilltop Drive as proposed by the
Digiovanni's.
Sincerely,
the neighbors within a , OF f radius of I2590hi1/top pnve
\
&
.
.
:
&
.\
\
�
/
�
f
%
*
e
t
}
\
./
/
�
»
�
§
ƒ
e
&
ƒ
zx�
/
,
+
ƒ
�
�
.
�
!
���
�
\
;
�
<
\
%
}
�
\
�
�
\
�
\�
�
f
�
§
\
&
!
�
�
\
/
q
«
�
°
G
\
%�a
/�
�/
�
�
\
�
`
}
%
.
� �
�
..
�
�
/�
August 22, 2005
Planning Commission
Town of Los Altos Hills
26379 Freemont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94024
Re: 12380 Hilltop Drive, Los Altos Hills, CA
Proposed Development of Digiovanni and Sander
ATTACHMENT
AUG 2 4 2005
We have lived at in Los Altos Hills since 1969. We live directly
across the street and will be the most impacted by the proposed project at 12380 Hilltop
Drive. We have had the opportunity to meet with Joe Digiovanni and Fiona Sander to
review and discuss their development plans. We wish to express to the Planning
Commission our strong support for their proposed project, including their necessary
request for a variance.
They are removing all of the structures currently residing in the side setback, thereby
improving the front elevation view. They are removing all of the developed area in
excess of the MDA, so drainage will be enhanced (an issue on our street). The front of
the house is placed farther from the front property line than required, making the side
setback variance request reasonable. They are not asking for more than what is already
there, so the overall project impact will be minimal.
We believe their proposed project is consistent with the existing homes in the area, and
will improve our neighborhood. We also appreciate their efforts to incorporate neighbor
input and gather support.
Sincerely,
,
Shari Selover-Fors
Los Altos Hills, CA 94024
Lance Fors
(V& -j Pyr c1 e Sfl-0D" & C�)pvA-.VN(
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN COMMITTEE AT]',f1CHME'�1�'OBfJ
NEW RESIDENCE EVALUATION i_
Applicant's Name: 5a N o(e,/ 2— G i DyG vtyi l• ".`'s
Address: 1238Ka +1111 -fvp DyN�
Reviewed by: NIE;60 9D i Ni N . Pfu� Date: x,96
Existing Trees: (Comment on size, type, condition, location with respect to building
site. Recommended protection during construction.)
Proposed Grading: (Impact on water table, nearby vegetation. Erosion potential. All
grading at least 10' from property line?)
Creeks and drainage: (Should a conservation easement be recommended? Sufficient
space between house and conservation easement for circulation. Will
construction impact wildlife migration (bridges, fences)? Is there a
need for removal of invasive species?)
Siting: (View impact: ridgeline, across valley, on neighbors. Will driveway
impact neighbors' privacy (lights, noise)? Recommended mitigation
(height, color, landscape).) I i _
'A M, v�U w (1 Se ✓� l 1
Other Comments:
CODEISEC.
C
peach.
A
C
:.2.4.1
SHEET
FIRS: DEPARTMENT
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818
(408) 378 4010 • (408) 378-9342 (fax) • w .sccfd.org
PMNREV1EWNNMBER 05 1647
SLUG PERMIT NUMBER A17ACHMENT
CONrflOLNUMBER
MIE MIMBEp 104-05-ZP-SD-VAR
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS
REQUIREMENT
of site plan for a proposed 988 square foot additon to an existing 3,692
foot single family residence with an attached garage.
of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access and
apply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be
ad as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with
I model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall make
ion to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable
-tion permits.
�d Fire Flow, The fire flow for this project is 1750 gpm at 20 psi residual
The required fire flow is available from area water mains and fire
(s) which are spaced at the required spacing.
naratus tCngtnelAccess Drivewu Required: Provide an access driveway
awed all weather surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 14 feet,
clearance of 13 feet 6 inches. Installations shall conform to Fire
lent Standard Details and Specifications sheet D-1.
RECEIVED
JUN 16 2005
TOWN OF LAS ALTOS HILLS
CRY MANS SPECS NEW RJUM AS
OCCNpp
CONST. TYPE
APpI1wM .
MTE
PAGE
1H ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
FIONA DIGIOVANNI
6/9/2005
1 DF 1
.IFLOOfl
ApEp_
LOgD
OESCpIPT1ON
�.
Residential Development
Rucker, Ryan
INE OF ppOJEtt
LOOATION
SFR- DIGIOVANNI
112380 Hilltop Dr
Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District
Serving Santa Clam County and the communiees of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos,
Los All. Hills, Los Gotos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Samm,,a
ATTACHMENT i a
LOS ALTOS HILLS PATHWAY COMMITTEE MEETING
Minutes, June 27, 2005
Meeting was called to order at 6:10 by Chairman Chris Vargas.
Members present: Ann Duwe, Anna Brunzell, Nick Dunckel, Nancy Ginzton, Mike Kamangar,
Ginger Summit, Chris Vargas, Jolon Wagner.
Members absent: Nancy Ewald, Dubose Montgomery, Bob Stutz
Ad Hoc committee reps: Carol Gotheb, Les Ernest
Agenda modified to allow for items of attendees to be heard first
2. A. Recommendations on properties:
i. 27161 Moody Rd. Committee reviewed prior recommendation at request of owner.
Confirmed original recommendation that owner pay'pathway in -lieu' fee based on entire
frontage of property along Moody Rd.
ii. 13241 Burke Rd. Clarification of recommendation made at prior meeting. IIB path to be
installed along W. Sunset No path required on Burke Rd., since path already exists on opposite
side of Burke.
iii. 13686 Page Mill (lands of Kim)
a) install IIB path along foot of bank (below Page Mill Rd), joining access to Page Mill roadside
paths at western edge of property.
b) Request right-of-way easement if necessary to allow for path in this location.
(Note: Chris will talk with staff to determine status of plans in Page Mill improvements, to
insure pathway allowances are included in any work to be done)
iv. 13198 La Cresta Dr (lands of Chan and Hua) Concern about where property actually is, since
driveway access from La Cresta is ambiguous. Owner described flag -lot driveway easement
from LaCresta, with property actually bounded by Nina Place on eastern boundary. Committee
determined any future path on Nina Place should be located on opposite side of road. Therefore,
recommendation is to accept pathway in -lieu fee. If property actually extends into Nina Place,
request easement access along Nina Place, but no path required.
v. 12139 Foothill Lane. This property discussed at earlier meeting
vi. 12390 Hilltop Drive (lands of Picetti). Pathway along Hilltop should be on opposite side of
road Easement and IIB path required along Hillview Road.
vii. 12380 Hilltop Drive (lands of Sander & Giovanni) Pathway along Hilltop should be on
opposite side of road. Therefore, accept pathway in -lieu fee for this property.
viii. 12670 Corte Madera (lands of Arora). Accept pathway in -lieu fee.
2. B. Master Pathway Plan Recommendations (requested by council)
i. 13115 Maple Leaf Court to Via Feliz. Residents Mendez (13 115 Maple Leaf Ct. and new
owners of 13114 Maple Leaf Ct) present. A pathwayjoining Elena and Via Feliz had been
recommended by Pathway Committee, starting along the south boundary of 13115 Maple Leaf
Ct When owner Mendez developed property, Planning Commission approved a fence along