The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0276.095• 01. ... ~ . -. .' . o City of Palo Alto City lVlanager's RepOI't TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNClL FROM: CITY MANAGER .-'GENDA DATE: Jane S, 1995 DEPARTMENT: Plallning ed CommUDily EllvirollmeDf CMR!276:9S SUBJECf: Varia"ce Deuial.ad Conditional U ... Permit Approval for 14S7 Edgewood Drive, Plio Alto, Califomi. REOUEST On March 20. 1995, the City C<>unciI overturned • Zoning Administrat", Variance approval b: 1451 Edgewood Drive, which would bave allowed. secood living unit (cottage) to intrUde len feet into the rear setback and the overall square footage 00 the site to be 165 square feet beyond the maximum allowed. The City Counct1 directe<i that the fiOOUl~ b: denying the Variance return to Council !Or rmal action. The City C<lur.cil further acted to rerain jurisdiction over the Coo<frtional Use Permit applkatioo, 50 !bat • revised project would Mum diIe<:\ly \Q Council b: review, The requested Variance findin~ are attached \Q Ibis report (see AltacbmeDI I} The appIicanI has rerurned with a revised plan b: the second tmir. This plan con!onns to aIl2<l<ling ordinance requirements. The findings b: approval of the Cooditional Use Permit b: the revised project are also attached (see Attachment 2). RECOMMENDATIONS Stalfrecommcnds ~ CouncI1 deay the Variance, 94-V·15, based 00 the attached findings, and adopt Ibe find!n~ approving the Conditional Use Permit b: the revised cottage, in OCCOldance with plans dated April 6, 1995. POI.ICY IMPUCATIONS There are two existing Comprehensive Plan policies relevant to Ibis application. The first is Policy I in the Housing Element, which slates that the City should "maintain the generellow density character of existing single-family areas.' This policy is further expressed as a set of R·I design standards b: sing1e·fanuly houses and cottages. Page I af4 . - ~-",-.-'" '-. ;;:;-:-~.~ .... ~--. .. --~ .. -.... .' . '. ,-.. o The secood policy is Policy 2, Program 3, in !be Housing Element. which states that !he City . should "Continue !he <:«Iage provision in !he R,\ zooc:s, ensuring that DeW development fits in with 1be existing single-family properties." It has been !he general practice olthe City 10 allow scc:ood units, wben there would be !IO adverse land use impacts or detrimontal effects 10 odj&eell! property in Ih<: are.t as a result. The revised COItJ.ge proposal is consistent with both ol the above Comprehensive Plan poiicies, as ... 11 ""with 1be Santa CIars Valley W~ District porlcies and requirements that prohibit any devclopmenl wilhin 20 feet olthe top ol. creek bank. The revised rottage design provides 40 feet between the top ol the creek I>anIr. and the edge ol the wuage. EXECJrnyE SUMM4RY Table I. on page 3, surnmarize5 1be allowed, oppflCl!11t requested, Zoning Administrator approved, Pianning Commission re<:oounemlcd and City Council directed setbac1<s and floor area 011 the s~te. Summary of City Council Hearing: At !he Marcil 2C. J 995 City CoU!l<:i1 hearing 00 this ;'<sue, the Council decided that !here w= 00 .,,<:eptional or exlrllordinary circumstances or cooditioos applicable 10 the property in th'1l all sites oo1be north side of Edgewood Drive along San francisquito Creek have a similar relatiooship 10 Ibe creel<. The City CouncIl also decided that prohibiting the """ of 2,491 square fee! ol area on this site does DOl COIIStitute an wueasouabJe property loss or unnecessary bardship, and that. to-foot encroachment into !he rear setback would red""" the stability of the aukl>ank, subject impI'O\-=ts 10 greater risk ofllooding, and create impacts on the natural habitat 00 the site and that 1be additiorW J 65 square fee! over the lIUlJdmum a/lowed floor area would result in overbuil<fmg !he site. The City Council also detennined that • Conditional Use Permit fur • <<>!tag< 00 !he site could be appropriate if the cottage meets 011 zoolng requirements. ~Proposal: The applicant has revise<! his proposal so that an zoning requirements including selba<:.ks and floor area are met (see Atta<:hment 4). Staffhas drafted the findings necessary 10 deny the Variance application and the finamgs necessary 10 approve the Use Permit fur the revised wuage (see Altachmeots I and 2, respectively). ~. ---,--:----- '-"---. -.-. . > . • -~ ,- .. ,\ ' ," . ' '. .'. " , ' " g ~ ~ ? w So .. • TABLE I Setback> and Floor A .... -Allowod by Original Ap~",yeq by Recommended Zoning Application Zoning hyPlaMing Ordinant:e Admtni8tmtor Comm;uion Rear Se'back 20r ... H ... to (ee. 20f .. t Floor Atea ~,?OO RQ. ft. 6,O2? RQ. ft. 5,865 sq. ft. S,6SS "'I. ft. Hou •• SqUBte 6,000 .q. ft, S,16? RQ. n. S,005 sq. n. 5,005 sq. ft. Foo •• 1!" C"".ae SqUBte 900 RQ. ft. 860 .q. ft. 860 sq. ft. 860 sq. ft. Footage . Distance ftom 40r .. ,-22 reet 30 ree. 40 reet' toporored( bank 20 foot 5CVWD e8!1ement plus 20 foot mqllired rear ~Ihack . Diteelodby Applicant', City Council RovillOd Ie Propo .. 1 20r ... 20 feet 5,700 "'I. ft. 5,700 RQ. ft. 6,000 RQ. ft. 5,005 RQ. ft, mltXimum Dependenton I 695"'1. ft. !Jizeofmain hou .. 40r ... • 140 feet' 'Q , '. '" ' 'i. . '. \J 04 .. "/i' \ ." " ;- \ » " . "'. ' " -, ~ .. , " " ' .. " " ,~. "'.""J o "SCAI, IMPACT There is DO fiscal impact 10 !be City as a result of this application. EN\1JRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This item is • Class 3 categorical exemption under Section 15303.(1) or the California Enviroomen!JII Quality Act (t.'EQA). ATTACHMENTS I. Findings foe Variance Denial 2. Findings foe Conditional Use Permit Approval .3. CMR: 176:95 -Agenda Date March 20, 1995 -witb Attacbments 4. PlAns daled April 6. 1995 (City Council Members ooIy) PREPARED BY, Usa Grote, Zoning Administrator DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: if4?UI//ilL"'~? KENNETH R. SCHREIBER Din:cto< of Planning and Community Eavironment cc: Ms. Bassi. Lee, P.O. Box 51892, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Me. Charles Stevens, 1431 Edgewood Drive, Palo Aho, CA 9430 I Ms. Bonnie Slein, 1449 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Ms. Roberta G. McKee, 1491 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Mr. Henry Cohan, 1425 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Mr. Tom Sloan. 2S5 N. Market Street, '255, San Jose, CA 95110 Mr. Sinh T. Nguyen, 1451 Edgewood Drive, PaloAlto,CA 94301 hge4of4 .; OtyOPa!oAlto ~t='J.uond App!icatioa No. 94-V-U: 14S7 E4gewooc! Drive VariaDce 94-V -IS is dc:n-'ed for die Iocatioa mI c:onstnJCtion 0( I S<COOd living unit (cottage) approximate!)' "'" feet from die flood COOIrol uscment at die rear 0( !he property, ""'"'" I twenIy foot se<bact from die easemeDl line is otherwise requir«! mI for I combined I<JIaJ IIoor ami 0( 5,86S square feet. as per!llO<flfied plans dated lanuazy 4,1995, ",bote S,700 ~ feet is !he maximum O!hcrwise allowed, at 14S7 &lgewood Drive, &-1 (929) Zooe District. Palo Alto, California. The project is denied based on die following finding •. F1NPlNGS L 'There are 00 excep!lonal or .xtraonfUlaI)' cin:urnstaDces or coDlfruoas applicable" !be property invo:ved that do 00( apply generany 10 property in !he same <fISttict iD thaI all sites in die <fJS!Iict adjacenl " San Frallcisqulto Creek have • similar ",latkv-..ship 10 die Datura! feature mI il is ~ " maintain !he =r .. !back mI fIoo< L..,. "'00 for creek stabilily, flood risIc mIuction and habital protection; 2. The gnuI\ing 0( !he appflC3tion is 00( necessaJ)' for !he preservation mI ezgoymcot 0(. substantial property rigbt o(!he applicant, or " preVent unreasonable property loss or """"",,,'I)' b.atdsl>ip in !hat • boose mI couage, <X>mpat.ible in size wi1h odJet booses mI cottages in !he ami, con be built on !he site witbouI encroacbing into !he rear setback or excee<fmg !he maximwn fIoo< area. Probibiting !he use 0( 2,497 square feet 0( site area on this site Iloes 00( coostirul< ao unroason.oble property loss or unnecessary bardship; and 94.1S.&. IgIds1c 25QH.lrnlltatA I<el.Ue i'.o. b lO2.5O Pai:lAl'lD.CA94lJ3 415. 329.2.44l 415..329.224DFax June 5, 1995 Page 1 , 1. The pntiDg 0( the oppIiglion will be dcIrimenIaI and injurious 10 propct1y or improvemeol:l in the vicinity in that • ten foot encroachment Into the rear Sdba<:k will mllx:e the stability 0( the c"",kbo.nk 01] the sire and the additional 16S squan: feet, over the maximum floor area, will n:suh iD overbuilamg Ihe sileo s. Jooeph Simitian Mayor Juno: S, 1995 "''' .--, Juno: S, 1m Page 2 ·' .. ...... Appli<:alion No. 94-UP40: 1457 Edge ... ood Drive Use Permit 94-UP-40 is approved for !be Ioc3tion and rollSlnlctioo of • secood IiviDg IlIIit (COllage), .. per atIJICbed plans. at 1457 Edg .... ood Drive, 1t·1 (929) Zone District, Palo Alto. California. The project is approved based on !be IDIIowing finding. and is subject 10 !be conditions listed below. 1. The p<oposod use at !be proposed Ioc3tioo will not be detrimental or injurious 10 property or improvements in !be vicini<y. and will not be cIetrlmental 10 !he publlc health. safety. general ,.elfare or convenience. in that !he cottage 1IIiIl be Iocat<d ",wanl !be back of !he site. primarily behind the main boose. and will be mjnjmany visible from the pubflC rigbt-o{''''''J. It will have vehicular access in common ~ !be main residence and "'ilI be arcbitechlr2lly compatible wilh tho main residence; 2. The proposed ase will be _ and conducted in • manner in accord with !be Palo Alto Comprebensive Plan and !be JlIlIl'O'CS of Tille 18 of !be Palo Alto Municipal Code. in lhat !be Cily of Palo Alto Comprebeosive Plan rooside" s<coDd living units affordable housing an.:! encourages them wbere possible. Second living unilll Ill<: coaditiooaIly pennitkd uses on lots greater !han 13 ,000 square feet in !be It-I (929) ""Dins district. Tbe subject site exceeds minimum size requirements and \be c.ottage meets an ocher applicable tooing requiremcn!s for !be 1t-1(929) disIrict, includ'mg seIbacb. bcight, pamng and sW:. 94UP40.lg2 250Hamil!onA\'f!rIUf PD, Bol(}([2 .. '{) PWMo,CA94303 4l5.m,2441 m.3;S,2:l4(lFax June S. 1995 Page 1 " .... ::: .. ~. "..-'"r;:." ~ . ~--: o I. The projeu sllalI be CODSIIUCIi:d in subotantial compliance .-lib the approved p/aDI, daI<d ~ 6, 1m, on file in the offic<o of the Department of I'IaIminr aOO Community Environmcnl. S. Joscpb Slmitian Mayor 1une $, 1m This focm comIiIutes the use permit for whicb application was made, A copy of this lISe permit should be J>i--to the Buildir>g Division Ilong .,jib your builamg permit applicaOOn. 94UP40.1&2 1une 5. 1m Page 2 • • .~. r .", o AUachm(At3 City of Palo Alto· City Manager's Report TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER AGENDA DATE: Marcil 10, 1995 DEPARTMENT: PIlIaaiDg IDd Community EDvU-onmeat CMR:176:95 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL OF VARIANCE NO. 94-V,15 AND CONDmONAL USE PERMIT NO.94-UP-40 AT 1457 EDGEWOOD DRIVE REQUEST This report addre= aa oppeaI 0( a Zoning Administrator decision, which approved I Use Permit and Variaaces for a second living unit (cottage), with cOIlditions that allowed the cottage \0 be ""'.ated 10 feet away from the edge 0( the flood control easement line, which would be 1(,> feel into the required rear setback. and the overaU floor area OIl the site to be 5,865 square feet, which is 165 square feet over the maximW!l square """'ge· allowed Two ~gbbool appealed the Zoning Administrator's decision, based upon the belief that DO hanIsIlip exists OIl the site and that aa increase in floor area and an encroachmeDt into the rear 5C1back would resuh in ll1ISightly overbuilding 0( the parcel. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the City CouuciI: Deuy the oppeaI and uphold the Zoning Administrator approval 0(. variance and coocJjtional use permit for the location and coostl1K;lioo. 0(. second living unit (cottage) approximately to feet from the edge o(the flood cootrol easement line at the rear of the propeny. where a 2O-fuot setback IIom the easemenl line is oIherwise required, and a total floor area, for the main bouse aad cottage rombiDed, 0( 5,865 square feet. where 5.700 square feel is the maximum oIherwise allowed. The PlaDning Commission ~ds that the City Council: Deuy the appeal 0( the use permit for the cottage and the variance for 165 additional square feet of floor area and approve the appeal of the to-foot rear .... 10(5 . " -; o yard encroachment This action would l':sult in the cottage being located 2l) feet 6'om the ea..<cmcnt line, which c:omplies wi1h rear setback requirements, and I !old flocx area. fer the main house and COllage c:ombincd, of 5,865 S<jllIIre i"e<;1, wbere S,700 squa:e feet is the maximum otherwise allowed. roycy IMPLICATIONS There are tw" existing City policies that are relevant I<> this appli<:atlon. Tbe fl1"Sl is P<>Ii<:y 1 in the Hoosing EJcment of the existing Comprehensive Plan. The p<>!icy states that the City shoold 'maintain the general Iow-dcnsity character of existing single fanuly areas.' This policy is further expn-ssed as I set Gf R-l design standards fer single-family houses and cottages. The second policy is PClIicy 2, Program 3, in the Hoosing Element of the Comprehen slve Plan, which stales that the City shoukI "Continue the cottage pr"visioo in the R-I zones, ensuring that new development fits in with the existing single-family properties.' It b4s been the general practice "f the City to allow second units when there would be no adverse land use Impacts or detrimental effects I<> adjaGellt property in the &rell as a result. Tllen: • ..., 00 policies in the current Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan whicb require specific setbacks from the top Gf creek banks fer single-family houses or c<>IUges. There an: approximately I gO single-family parcels in the City of Palo Alto which cfIreCtly abut creeks. II should also be DOled that single-family houses constructed in group5 of three 0< fewer al • lflM are exempt from the CalilOrnia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A cOllage which woold be located >0 feet away from the top Gf I creek bank does DO! trigger the need fer !!II environmental assessment. Lastly, the project is consistent with the Santa Cbin Valley Water District p<>!icies and requirements that prohibit any d..-velopment within 2l) feet of the ~ of • creek bank.. AItbough the Water District setback is intended 10 provid<: room for creek maintenan.-.., nther than creek preservation in • natural state, me<:ting or exceeding the setback ...;n also contribute I<> less cflSluIbance of vegetation and wildlife associated with • creel<. The Zoning AUministrator approval would result in most of the cottage being 40 feet away from the top of the creek bank (20 feet away from the easement rme), except fer ibe northwest com<:r, which would be 30 feet away from the top of the bank (teo teet away frorn the easement line). The attached Planning Commission report provides further cflSCUSsion abo-.It each Gfthe above policy implications (see the attached Planning Commission staff n:pO<t dated February 22, 1995). !'aio lor 5 . ---~ • EXEClITIVE SUMMARY The fOllowing cbart ~ the allowed. requested and approved set~""ks and flooc IItQ on the site. The attached Planning CommJssioo staff report provides mOR detail abouI the criginal proposal, the modified approval granted by the Zoning Admin;strator and the appeal of the Zoning Administrator', decision (sec the attached Planning Commission staff report, dated F ebnwy 22, 1995). Allowed Approved By Recommended by By Requested by Zoning Planning Code AppIicaDl Administratac Commission Rear Setback 20ft. 2ft. 10 It 20ft. Floor Area 5, iOO sq.ft. 6,021 sq.ft. 5,865 sq.ft. 5,865 sq.!\. House Sq.Ft. 6,000 S<! 1t. 5,167 sqJi. 5,005 sq_ft. 5,005 sq.ft. C<>ttage Sq.FL 900 sq.ft. 860 sq_ft. 860 sq.ft. 860 sq.ft. Distance 40 feel' 22 feet 3Q feet at 40 feet· from closest point Top of Creek Bank • 2O-foot SCVWD easement plus 2O-fOO! required rear setbaclt. Building Permit fill" Main House: A building permit was issued fill" Ille main bouse, as reduced in size by L!,e Zoning Administrator'. approval conditions, in late December 1994. The permit was issued because the main bouse, by itself, meets all zoning and development requirements fill" the R-I district. A buikfmg permit cannot be issued fill" the cottage untll after the appeal is acted tIpoIl by the City Council. Summary of Planning Commission Hearing: The Planning Commission beard the appeal ofthi, item on February 22, 1995. Meeting minutes ""' included in Ill. MarcIl 16, 1995 packet fill" City Council infill"matiolL Six rae. J 015 \:--. . ,' ~ .. - " _." \ . : - o people spoke against the variances for the increased Floor Area Ratio and encroaehment into the R'!l setback. Three of the people speaking against the variance ... ·cre neighbors, ooc was from the Santa Clara County Occk Coalition, """ was from the Santa aura County Audubon Society and O!IC was an interested resident The neighborhood residents wen: con<:emcd about overbuilding on the site and the City not adhering to the R-I requirements developed in the late 1980s. The representatives from the Creek Coalition and Audubon Society and the interested resident were concerned about the poIcnIial impact on the creek and wildlif<: habitat They stated tiuol existing setbacks, measured from the edge of casemr:nts, arc the IOOIs avaIlable to protect creeks and sensitive envirooments in the absence of other Ccmpre!>ens;-,e Plan policies. All of the speakers opposed to the variances want to sec existing regulations implemented. The AAlowing three people spote in fovor of the variance application as modified by the Zexting Administrator: the architect, the applicant, and IIIl interested resident. n,., "",hitect discussed his design phil0s0pby lOr the bouse and cottage and the fact that the main bouse bad • large setbact from the front property rme in order to fit into the neighborhood. He noted that the cottage would not be v;sible from the street and would therefore 00( have a delrimental impact on the neighbors. He also noted th3t the creek and =ent represented a physical constraint 00 the site that presented • hardship when designing the bouse. The app~cant spoke a1>out bis desire 10 have his parents live in the cottage and that it is important in his culture 10 take care of elderly parents. The interested resident also spot. about the impor1aDce of caring lOr the elderly and that the applicant wanted 10 live in Palo Abc> because of the schools and desirable community life. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Use Pemrit lOr ihe cottage and the variarn:e for 165 square f<:ct of additional FAR. but deny the variance lOr • len 100t intrusion into the rear setback. The recommendatioo also included the requirement that revised plans be submined to the Planning Department lOr approval as confi..",.,tioo that they conform 10 all pertinent requirements. Ahemative a<:tioos lOr the City CounciJ 10 c"",ide! are included in the atta<:hed Planning Commission staff report (see the atta<:bed Planning Commission staff report, dated February 22. 1995). FISCAL IMP.MI Then: is 00 fiscal impacllO the City regarcfmg any of the actions 00 the appeal. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Single-family houses built three or f<:wer at a time ore categorically exempt from the California Environmental Qolality Act (CEQA). Pac-4 of 5 .~';;" . "'. .. _.:c-.. ~. " ~ ;. . ", . ~ ~ " . .. .. ~~.-" " ---:. ~ " ~ AUACBMENTS Planning Commission Staff Report. with attachments, daled February 22, 1995 L Lett<:r &om Tom Sloan, dated October'2:r, 199-:./ : b. C<Jpy ofZooins AdministratOF approval ofvariazy' 4-V.IS, dated December IS, 1m ' c. C<Jpy of Zooing Administrator approval of ,/ ,~t 94·UP-40, daled December IS. 1994 . d. AppcaI lOrm and petition 10 Palo Aho City Cooncil, daled December 27. 1994 c. i.dter from Richard Anderson, SCVWD. dated February 8, 1995 ( Minutes from Zooing AdministratOF November 17. 1m a.-wI December 1.1994 public: bearings . !-L<:tten in opposition 10 the project l!. Letters in support of the project PREPARED BY: lisa Grote, Zoning Administratoc DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: ~1d tfL-kd., e lHR.SCHREIBER .? Director of Planning and Community Environment ce: ,Ms. Bonnie Miller Stein. 1449 Edgewood Drive, Palo Aho CA 94301 Ms. Deena Mossar, 1024 Emersoo Street, Palo Aho CA 94301 Ms. Bassie Lee, P.O. Box 5!892, Palo Aho CA 94303 Mr. Charles Stevens, 1431 Edgewood Drive, Palo Aho CA 94301 Ms. Roberta O. McKee, 1491 Edgewood Drive, Palo Aho CA 94301 Mr. Henry Caban. 1425 Edgewood Drive, Palo Aho CA 94301 Mr. Tom Sloan, 255 N. Market Street, #255, San Jose CA 95110 Mr. Binh T. Nguyen. 1457 Edgewood Drive, Palo Aho CA 94301 . , -. @ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: PLA.lIIN1NG COMMISSION FROM: ."-GENDA DATE.: Februar/22.1995 SVBJECT: Appeal of Zoning Administrator Approval of Variance No. 94-V·lS and Cooditiooal Use Permil No. 94-UP40 at I4S7 Edgewood Drlv~, Palo Alto, CA. RFmMMENDATJON swr recommends that !be Planning Coonnission recommend Ihat !be City Council: Deny !be appea1 and uphold !be Zoning Admini.."tra1O< approval of a variance and conditiooal use permit for !be location and construction of a secocd living unit (cottage) approJdma!eJy 10 feel from !he edge of !be flood COO!rol. easement line at !he rear of !be property, where a ~foot setback from !be casement line is 0Iberwise requiRd. and a IOIaI floor area, for !be main house and cottage <Xl!Ilbined. of S,86S square feet. where S.1OO ~e feel is !he ma~imum otherwise allowed. BACKGROUND The site is a flat. rectaDgUlarJy shaped parcel with San Fraocisqullo Creek nmoing along its back (JIOf1hern) edge. h is an exceptiooa1J.y large lot-The gross lot size is 19,000 square feel. bul !be net lot size is 16,SOO square feel because !bere is • ~f()()(-wide flood COO!rol. easement measured from !be lOp of !he bank. oouthward into !he property. The zoning onIinance docs not permit area within an easement 10 be calculated into !he overall size of !he lot-In addition, wbeD easements exist, required sc!backs are measured from !be easement line rather than from !be property lioc. "'-" . o Tbe IppIiconI origilIaIly applied for • use pennil for a delacbed cottage on !he site, and • variance so that !he cottage would be Jocaltd 18 feel into the required rear setback, 2 feet southwar.l from !he edge of the flood euemelll line. In addition, the &ppIkanI: origiDaIIy requested thai the IOIaI floor area on the ~I equal 6,027 square feet, which is 321 square feel over !he maximum S,700 square feet allowed (see Attachment t, Letuor of application, dated October 27, 1994). Zoning Admini..<trator Decision: The Zooin& A.mllnisIntOl approved • modified Variance toDd • modified Use Permit for Ihe cottage, with coodilioos thai improved !he location of !he cottage so IlIaI it wcuId be 10 feet away from the edge of !he flood COIlIrol easemeoIline, which would be 10 feel into the required rear setback, and reduced !he overall tlooc area 00 Ihe site 10 .s ,86S square feet, wbich is 165 square feet over !he maximum square fooIage allowed (see Attachments 2 and 3, rcspec\lvely, dated December IS, 1(94). The following cbart summarizes the allowed, requeo1Od and approved setbacks and floor area en the site: Allowed by Code Requested by Approved by Zooing AppIkant Administrator Rear SeIbacl: 20ft. 2ft. 101'_ F100r Area 5,700 sq.ft. 6,oz7 sq.ft. 5,865 sq.ft. House Sq.Ft. 6,000 sq.ft.. 5,167 "1ft. 5,005 sq.ft. Cottage Sq.Ft. 900 sq.ft. 860 sq.ft. 860 sq.ft. 212219S Pas. 2 '. .-. Appeal: Two neighbors appealed the Zoning Adnllnistratoc', decision based upon !he belief thaI m hardship exists on !he site and that an increase in tIoor area and an encroacllmenl into !he rear setback wouId result in unsightly overbuilding of the parccl (see Attacllmenl 4, Appeal form and Petitioo. dared December 21. 1994, 10 Palo AlIo City .C<Juncil regarding 94-V-IS). Although the appeal form indieates an appeal of buill the Use Permit and Variana, it appears that !he objection focuses OIl the variance for additional fioor area and the encroacllment into !he rear setback. II shoold be DOled that !he petition is JI()( dated and thaI !he project description providal in !he petition attached 10 the appeal descn1>es !he applicanfs ~lnaI proposal and DOt !he Zoning Administrator', approval, whlch reduced the tIoor area on !he site and increased !he setback from !he edge of !he easement. It is JI()( lrnown from reviewing !he petition wbelher an !he signatories object 10 !he Zoning Administrator's approval or if !hey ooIy object 10 !he original proposal. The two neighbors that tiled the appeal definitely object 10 the Zoning Administrator'S decision and bave .tared verbally that !he peti60n signatories also object !o !he Zoning Adnllnistrator'. decision. Building Permit for Main House: A building permit was issued for !he main bouse, as reduced in si7.e by !he Zoning AdminisIlator's approval cooditions, in late December 1994. The permit was issued because !he main boose, bY itself, meets an zoning and developmenl requiremell!S for the It-I disttict. A building permit canno! be issued for !he <OOage until after !be appeal is acted upon by !he City Council. POLICy IMPLICATIONS There are two existing City policies that arc relevw 10 !his application. The first is Policy 1 in !he Housing Elemem of the existing Comprebensive Plan. II states that !he City shoold: ·majnlain!he gcnerallow-<lensity cbaracl.el' of existing .in~family areas. This policy is further expressed as • set of It-I design standards for single-family bouses and <OOages. These standards help assure tbat new <levelopmenl and COllages are compatible with surrounding devetopmeDL The standards include having street access from • driveway in common with !he main residence. !he COllage being architecturally compatible with !he main residence and having parking screened from off-site views. P:~l'15 ... :fI . . '\.~ .--"-"", • 2122J95 Page 3 -.. '"'", '-.~ . ~ .. . . . ..... -"". o The secood policy is Policy 2, Prognm " in Ihe Housing Element of !he Comprehensive Plan. .. 1Iich states that Ihe City should: 'Continue the COlLage provision in Ihe R-l zooes, ensuring !bat DeW developmenl fils in with the e.;sting single-family properties'. It bas been the general practice 0( Ihe Cily 10 allow second units when there would be no adverse Jand use impacts as I resWL The poIentiaI impacts are assessed by determining wbether aD developmeDl requiremenls have been met, including: the parking requiremeuL for Ihe main bouse and Ihe collage, setbacb, heighllimits, size limits, and OOcnration of the cottage .way from neighboring properties and Iowan! Ihe main bouse on the same siIe. There ue DO policies in Ihe current PlIo Alto ComprehellSive Plan which require specific setbacb from Ihe lOp of creel banks for single-family houses or cottages. There are approxim3tety ISO single-family pan:e1s in Ihe City of Palo Alto which diIectIy abut creels. This DlllDber representS I relatively minor pocenlial impact on creeb within Ihe City. For this reason. iI is llIllihoty that specific creek setbacb on single-family lois, over and above the SanIa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) and cit)' yard se!backs that are already in place. will be =ommended by staff in the future a1tboogh any guidelines for1hcoming through Ihe Cooofmated Regional Managemeol Plan (CRMP) process will be favonably coosidered. II sbould also be ~ that single-family houses constructed in groups of three or fewer al • lime, are exempt from Ihe California Enviromnen!al Quality Act (CEQA). They are exempt because they do DOl1lave eDOUgh of an impact 0tI the natural env;,onmeDl 10 justify completing an environh~ assessment. . A cottage. which would be located . 30 feel. away from the top of. ~.k bank. does DO( trigger the need for an enviromnen!al assessment. Lastly. the project is consistent witt 'Ihe SCVWD policies and requirements that proInbit any development within 20 feel. of "le lOp of. creek bank. AItboogh the Water District setback is inJended 10 provide room foc creek mainJe!lilllCe raIher than creek preserv-oltion in. oaturBl state, meeting oc exceed"ll~ the se!back will also contribule 10 less disturbance of vegetation and wildlife associated willi • creek. The cottage in the subject application. as CODIIiIiooed by the Zoning Adm~tor, would be 30 feet away from the top of the creek bank, 10 feel. more than required by the SCVWD flood COIl!tOl easement. The SCVWD has coofir:med that the project, as conditioned by the Zoning Administrator. is acceptable 10 them (see Attacbmen1 S, leiter from Richard Anderwo, dated February 8. 1995). '". \>:.... 1 .~::. 2122J9S Page 4 . . -. . ~.' -. ,." ... o DIscuSSION There lIe three findings thaI must be made 10 approve I variance (Palo Alto Municipal Co&: IS.90.05O) aDd two findings that must be made 10 approve I use permit (Pa!o Alto Municipal Code IS.90.060). The v~ and use permit findings aDd conditions, IS made by !he Zoning Administrator, for !his app!icatioo are attached (see Attacbments 2 and 3, respectively). The dIscussion below summarizes the tational used 10 make each of the required findings. Variance Fmding No_ I: Tbe first finding is that the site is unique in that iI has exreptional or extraordinary pbysical coostraints or characteristics Iha! do DO( apply generaIly 10 property in the same dIstrict and which preven! CIle or more zoning requirements from being met. The Palo Alto 2.oruns Grldebook for R-I property references creeks bisecting sites as I unique situation (page 29 of the Guidebook) and uses Illa! condition as an example of grounds for making the first 0( the three required findings. There are unique circumstances on !his site because the creek aDd flood control easement reduce the siz., 0( the usable Jot area by 2.497 square feet (from 18,m square feet 10 16.498 square feet). aDd I!ie standard 2O-foot rear setback must be measured from the easement line, DO( the property line. whk:h creates, in effect, a 4().foot rear ..,tback from the lop 0( the creek bank. M06! Jots in the R-I zoning district do DO( contain. creek. If the Jot size aDd setback for this site were calculated in the standard manner for the R-l(929) zoning d"!Strict, the proposal wonld meet the fJoor area aDd setback requir~1IleIJrs. : Variance Fmding No.2: The secODd finding is that the variance is nee .. sary for the preservation &nd eIlioYment 0( a substantiaJ property right, aDd 10 proven/. unreasonable property loss or mmecessary hardship. There is. reasonable expectation in the R-I(929) zoning d"tstrict that a property owner can buiJd up 10 the maxIDJum floor area allowed on the site. aDd that, if the sire is large enough aDd use permit find"mgs can be supported with sufficient evidence. an accessory living nnil. or COllage, can also be built. If the subject sire was a !)"pica! R-I(929) parcel witllout a creek or easemenL, it could accommodate 6.448 squa .... ., ~ of fJoor area, and the rear setback and floor area maximum would DO( have 10 be violated. Allowing 5,685 square feet of fJoor area aDd • I(HOO( encroachment into the required 20 foot r= setbacl. through the variance process, preserves the property owner', right 10 have I house aDd coctage, appropriately sized for his property_ 2I22I9S Page S .. . ; o Variance Finding No.3: The thiro variaD<:e finding .tipulates dlat !be variance callDllt be detrimentoJ or injurious 10 property or improvemen15 in !be vicinily or 10 !he public bcaIth, saCety, genexal welfare or ~Yenience. The additiollal 16S 5q'Jare fc<'t that would be available to !he property owner as I resuk of !be Zoning Administrator', approval would !I()( be pen:ep!ible 10 !he average person viewing !be site from !be sidewalk or street. The 165 additional square feel amounts 10 DOe room with 12 x 14 foot dimensions or just under !be size of a DOe . car garage. which is Iypi<:aIIy 200 square feet. Since !he main house meets aD zoning reqairemeoIs, tlJe additiooaI 16S square feel is attributed 10 tlJe cottage, whicb sits at tlJe back of !be site behillcl!he main house. The cottage would !I()( be visible from tlJe street or sidewalk becallSe iI is beIlind !he main house. It would be 00 more visible 10 immcc!iate ncigbbors !ban if !be site was in c:ompliance with aD zoning reqWrements because bo!h side .abacks are being met. The oo-site parking requirement for bo!h tlJe main house aDd !he cottage has also been met. . IDcreasing tlJe rear setback 10 1en feet allows the cottage 10 be more closely oriented loWard the main house aDd away from neighboring houses, in addition 10 providing an aclditiooallell feet from !he lOp 0{ !be .tream bank. Reducing the size 0( tlJe cottage or furtber increasing !be setback would !I()( further reduce impacts on tlJe creek or neighboring Jliopenies. It sbould be """'" 1bai tlJere are several other sites in !he imrnMjate area that baYe existing cottages at !be back 0( tlJe parcel. Many 0( theSe cottages appear 10 baYe been built 30 oc 40 years ago. pr'.or 10 curren! regulations. These cottages bave existed for many. yeaB wiIbout a no6ceable detrimerua1 impact on !be surrounding neighborhood. h should also be noted that • garage or storage sbed could be located within !be 2O-Coot rear .abacI< Such. stnICrure would still bav. 10 be ()\It 0( !be 2O-foot flood control easemenl, but could be located al edge o(!be easement line. Accessory structures sucb as garages aDd storage sheds are seen as less inJensive uses than living space. aDd bave, lberefore. been aIJowed 10 be located within setbacks, as long as !hey are 7S feet from !be front property line aDd !I()( within easemenl areas. The Zoning Administrator believes that !be additiooaI 10 feet 0( setback from the easement line will a~te the additiooaI activir:y oc impact that may ocaIr from !be coaage use. as opposed 10 • garage oc storage use. . . ". ,'" I " i \ ~: . 212219S Page 6 ';. " . :" . " Use Pemrlt Finding No.1: The first ose permit finding is identical 10 tbe third variance finding. PIeasc n:fer 10 Voriance fiIIdlng No. 3 for a discussion 0( why the Zoning Admlnistrator made tbe finding. Use Permit Finding No.2: The secood ose permit finding states tba! tbe appticatioo shall be <:ODduc!ed in a manner compatible with the existing Comprehensive Plan and in a«ordance with tbe Zoning Code. As referenced in tbe Policy Jmpficatioos sectioo of !his report. the cocage is compatible wIth Policies I and 2 0( tbe Hooslng Element, which call for malnlaining the character 0( single-family neighborhoods and for the allowance 0( second uni!ll as long as they do DO! result in dettImentaI impac!ll on ':ile 5IlITOUDding neighborbood. The proposed cottage meets tbe intenl 0( tbe CooJprehensive Plan policy and also meets the design standards found in the R-I zoning guidelines. Two public hqrings on this item were held by the Zoning Administrator. The first one on November 17. 1994 was continued at the re<j\leSl 0( one 0( tbe neighbors because she had DO! had enough time \0 study the pIam and make comments on them. The second hearing was held on December I, 1994 at which time approximately ten people from the neighborbood attended. The mretiog minutes have been attached for Planning Commission review (see Attachment 6, mretiog minutes dated November 17 and December I. 1994). A variety 0( letters have been received about this Issue and have been attached for PIannlng Commission review (see Attachments 7 and S. Ielterli in oppo5ition and letters in support, respectively). The letters in oppositioo 10 the project state that granting the variance would result in 100 much development on tbe site and cookI negalively impact the creek. The letters in support 0( the project state that a boose and cottage on the sire Is a reasooable request and tba! the property owners an: responsible people. 2n2!95 Pagel •• <. , . c . ~ ;.. :l"_~\ ",to .',-' .. i. .-• "':-:: . ...;: "' o ALIERNATNES The Planning Coronllssioo can recommend one ol !be following actions 10 !be City Cooncil: I. Deny !be appeaIlIld upboJd!be Zoning AdminisIrator approval ol94·V·IS lIld 94-UP-40. based on the attached fiDdings lIld cooditloos; 2. Deny !be appeal and modify the Zoning Adm i!1istrator approval 10 confOClll 10 !be applicant's original ~ 3. Deny !be appeal and modify the Zoning Administrator approval as deemed appropriate for the specific site cha.:octeristics; oc 4. Approve !be appeal and do DOt allow any additiooal square footage on !be site over and above !be 5,700 maximum a!Iowed, and do DOt a!Iow any encroa<:bmeDl inlO the rear setback. FISCAL IMPACT There is 110 fiscal impact 10 !be City regarding any ol !be actioos on the appeal. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Single-family bouses built Ihree oc fewer at • time are categorically exempt from !be Cal~ BoviromnenIal Quality Act (CEQA). STEPS FOLWWING APPROVAL ProceecIIO!be City Council on March 20, 1995 for fina1 action on the appeal. AITACHMENTS!EXH!BJIS: I. Letter from Tom Sloan, dated 0c!00er 27, 1994 2. Capy of Zoning Administtator approval ol variance 94-V·I S, dal<d December IS, 1994 3. Capy ol Zoning Administrator approval oluse permit 94-UP-40, dated December IS, 1994 4. Appeal form and petition 10 Palo Alto City Council, dated December 27, 1994 S. Leiter from Richard Anderson, SCVWD, dated February 8. 1995 6. Minutes from Zoning Administrator November 11, 1994 and December I, 1994 public bearings 7. Letters in opposition 10 !be project 8. Letters in SU)lpOft o(!be project 2122195 Page 8 ---: .'-.... ....... . '0'" '-.~ , " }', ,~ COURTESY COPIF$c '~ ~~"~. -'". <;; . '\:.; --~,:.",-: :.' .. :- Ms. Bonnie Miller Stein, 144'J Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto CA 94301 Ms. Deena Massar, 1024 Emersoo Street, Palo Alto CA 94301 Ms. !lassie Lee, P.O. Box 51892, Palo Alto CA 94303 Mr. Olarles Stevens, 1431 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto CA 94301 Ms. Roberta G. McKee, 1491 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto CA 94301 YJ. Hen!}' CoIlan, 1425 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto CA 94301 Mr. Tom Sloan, 255 N. MaI!ret Street, 1255, San Jose CA 95110 Mr. Bini> T. Nguyen, 1451 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto CA 94301 Prepared by: Lisa Groce, Zoning Administrator Project Planner: Lisa Groce, Zoning Administrator DivisIooIDepartment Head Approval: Ni!!!;y M. Lytle Chief P!annjng Official 2/22/95 Page 9 METRO OESIGN GROUP 1 ;; 0Ci0BER 27, 1994 CITY a' PAID J\Lro ~ OEPJ\Imtmr 1W!IL'IQl AvmJE 250 PAIO lIL'IO, CA 94 301 ATmI: JOC ax.ctll\ .' -'.-". ~ APPLtCATKN lEE A!IMIT J\PPLIClITlQ; 1457 ~AvmJE PAID M...:ro, CA VlIRIl\NCE API'UCA1'IaI o JREVlSE~ RECEivED OCT 271m __ OF .......... -COIAM.Tl'V~ <j'i-Up-'i 0 'l,{-V-IS 'iIE ARE l'.PPLYn¥:; F(I\ A "'l\!UMJ:E ro ~ A = a::IIT>GE WI1lIIN A RB;lUIRm REAA ll\Rll SETBI\CI( A>D IN = C<' nlE ALt.CWA!ILE F.A.R. WE ro 'lHE SITE'S PRO><IMIT'i 'iQ SAN Fl<AOCIS(~JIro CREEK. '!HE FCI.LCWING IS A"< EXPf.AINATICN CE' BCW 'lIDS APPL1Cl\TIOO FCI< A VAAlAN:E MEETS ALL OF '!HE a:N>!1'IONS REOUIRID FOR M'PIOJJ\L. SAN nwo: SQUrro CREEl< RUNS = 'mE REM OF 'lliIS P!a'£!\T'l CREAl"I>G ~ ~ """01 ARE ror TIPICAL OF ALL TdE IDlES AI.CN; HXDiXO DRIVE. IN AlJOITIOO. THIS PAfliC\JU,R PKl'EJd i TAPERS lQOl\RD 'IllE REM ro A S<>IEHlAT ~ REM YAAD r.or WIDnl. 2.1 tRN GR>.NTIN:; "mE VlIRI1H:E. rr >OJID !Or <H<ER N<'i SPEcrAL PRIVLEIG: roT aJRRBm.1' mJClW) BY 0iHER NEIGIOCP5. =S Pl<:PERTY HAS AN EXCESSIVE REAR SETBAO< WE 'PO >On! "mE S.C. V ..... O. EASD!ENX J>ro lILro mE JoroITICli OF A l\E1\R SZl'lW:K. TlllS EXCESSIVE S<:TIl>O( ~ IS IOl' RB;!UIRED FCI< SOlE OF OiliER NE:lGIIBCRS Al.(tC E!:GD<XX> lJUVE. IT IS EEJCAt5E OF =S £J>.S<Mfm' THAT 'IHE F .A.R. IS 50 RESnUCrIVE. IN A!DlTI<:N. 'llIEIU': smos 'ID BE QUITE A FE>l omm GUEST rorrl\GES IN 'IllE Iw.!DiATE AREA LOCATE!> TC>1!\RD THE REAA OF THEIR .PFICHRllES. 255 N.. ",'AFlKET ST .. SUITE 255 SAN JOSE. CA 95113· TELEPHONE (4Q812S0-665C -FAX t':'':S ~C·66S6 3.) nmm; N:). 3 f'INM,Ly. tIE FEEL '!"Hl'Il" (RQ( ~ 1mS VAlUAlCE. IT w:uD !Cl' ~ 'l1IE' HFAVm, SAt'ETY AfD ~ Of" m'i CF 'l'!lE !lEIGHOCIlS. = SE."TI!I'CKS f10I EXISTnG PRJPfm. LINES tIIIL !!EFl' OR EXCE!D = KI<MI\L ~. "mE ~ taJLO HOT IMPACT 'll!E ~ Of' 'l'!lE S.C.V.W.D •• lISE l'IHIIT l\I'l'UClITIa' "mE a:N:>ITI<HIL USE Pm!lT Mr a:.IENl'S AAE Am.fiN:; Eat IS i'O a:fIS'rR!JCI" A GJfST == ~ 860 5:]. IT. xr 'll!E l!EAA 1'CI<Tla< a !'HE:Dl u:R'. IT W!U. Bli: I./X:lt7W BU!ZW 'lBEIl< EKrosw To«) - stair RESIt>fN:E (~"lU IN Eat BUIwnG OfPAIm'J!NX PLAN OIE.Q( nlOCESSIN:;). WE FEEL ~ iHIS WCATICN IS !lEST stlITm FCR 'll!E GJfST = I'tR l\U. tHE HOG!lllCI1.S 1oOU0l ~ mrs SIft. ANi CIH/!R LCCATICN Fa< 'l'HE GtIEST ~ HE num. RE(ItIIRm AN ~ INlO It SII:lEY:MD~, 1HUS lMFOSIN:; a: 'l'HE NEIQIBCI!S \'lDoIS AN:> PlUVlQ". A (DST 001"l70GE 15 cnlSISrl>m' wrm 7HE ~ / EXISTnG RESItflffl:.\L 2CImC D1S'llUC'I' • = !IXJSIlS AS WEIL AS 0l'IiER ~ snM:'lUR&S O\N BE Fa.JND xr THE ~ Of' HNrt ~ .f'R"IOJPERlIES .. =S c:u:sT CCIl"n!GE S!WL NEVER BE USED AS A RI!NrAL lJNlT. IT WilL lDIEVER. BE USED FCI< c:vr Of' KW< QJESTS no!. flME TO rIME. DCH Q' T!!E NEIGHBORS IlhVE HI\D nlE ~.mTY 1"0 IlEVU'" mE PU\NS Eat 'l'IlE SIn: AN/) ME IN SUPFa<I' Of' IT. SIlCU1> Ya:J I!I\VE N« ontER <VESTI~, PU"ASE «NIT HESITATE 'lO CALL ME }I.l': (408) 280 -6650 Appllcatiool N/). 94-V-1S: 1451 Edgewood Drive VIIiance 94-\'-15 is apptOVtd fQ[!be Iocatiool..., comtruc:tion 0(. oecood IiviJl8 nni1 (cottage) approximately lea f<et from the flood W!lIroI easement ot the rear at !be property, ",bme • twen£)' fool setI>a<l< rn:.n the easemeDI TIOe is ~ «qUiled. C<lmbfDed with the p!oposo:S main dwelllng, COII:itzUcIXm of Ibc cottage 'IIOOld R'SUl! in • lola! floor area atS,86S oqum feet, as per modifiedplaD$, wh= 5,699.5 square feet is the mn:jmmn ~ &lIow<:d, at 1451 Edgewood Drive, R-I (929) ZoDC District, Pal<> AItt>. California. The project is appro"" !lased OIl the followlD,g fuxfmgs and is subjeellO the cooditiom JiSI<d below. -FlNDlNGS I. TbeI:e an< excep!lonal <l< e1tlraot<fmary ,~ Q[ <OD<iiDoas appli<:abk 10 the property involve<! that do not apPly generally 10 property in the ..-cIistrict in dial San Frm:ioqui!o Creek runs lClOSS the rear Ihirty-oao 10 chirty-nine feet of the site. Tb= is • t..-eDty fool wide flood COIlIlOl eaoemeDl on \be &ile, ~ from Ibc lOp 0( the c:=l: 1laDk. witbin whicl! stnJCIUlt;S cJIlIllOI be built. Tb= is on addiliooal twenty fool ..-from the edge at Ibc eastm<DI within wbkll babitable stt\IC~ canoot be locate<! (wilh minor exc<p(ioos for /Illnimal intrusions inlo requiRcI setha<:b). The 2.491 squMe feet in the <:=k aDIl..........m..,.,... _ be calculated into the ov....n oqum mtlBe at the .it<. The above facIon JtSUk in. ~ overall lot Ji2e (16,49S square feet itlsIoad at 18,995 square feet). whiclIlIas Ibc followills impocts: 1) mlu= the buillfiDg area or the sit<; 2) ~ the aDo_ floor azea at S!ruCtlll<S OIl the sit< '" 5.699.5 squMe feet from 6,448.5 square feot; .,., ~) ftOvenIS the rear setback requiremcnI from being met; ".,&milb>A ....... POb108! ""'" Allo,CA9OB 415.329._ ~s. 3l9.l2<f£)f:'al.:. De«mbef 15. 1994 !'ag. 1 --:.- --:-. ".:, . ";,,-,- "::--'::, , ," , -' . ,.., o 2. The IfIIlIlng 0( !be appfic:atioo is ~..." fo< !he p=ervatioo and mjoymtlll 0(. substantial property right of !he applicant. and to preYenI nmeasooable I""P"'tr lots OC \1IIDOCe!3Al)I hardship in WI cottages are allowed IS c:ooditio<Ial wes in !he R·l zoning district 00 pat<els 10,000 square feet OC 1arJer. The net size of !he rubje<:1 site, witboul !he creek and eascmeu L-eoL, Is 16,498 square feet. which exceeds Ibe minimum lQ,ooo square foot requiremen<. Not granting !he YarUnces, IS conditione<! below. woold preyem !he cottage from being • size compar1Ible 10 0Iher COIt2geS in R-l zoning districts and aDowed by Ibe zoning onIinaDce. 94-V-lS Igldsk The maiD boose on !he site. IS coodiIioDed beJow. woold be S,OOS square feet. whicll _ aD applicable zooing requiremeIlts ilIcJudiDg faDing below !he 6.000 square fool maximum size limit. The =ge meets aD applicable zooing noquiremenIs except !he /Woni)' fool ~ set!>ack requiremenl, which canoot be mel beI;ause 0( !he creek 1o<:ation and ~ width. The creel< and ea_ ~ ~ !be amount of tIooc Ilea WI caD be built 00 !be site. Gmtting the ~, IS COlldition<d below. is ooc:essary fo< !be applicam to enjoy !he reasonable use of !he property, whidI includes • primary c!""!Iing and • second IiviDg mIit; and The grBD!ing 0( !be appiicaIion will no< be detrimenraI or iJYurious to property or improvementS in !he vicinily in that, IS ~itionc<l belo,..!he eonage wouJd be approximat.ely Ie1l feet from !he edge 0( Ibe flood con!roI ea_ line and approximately thirty feet from !be top of !be creek bank. The incrascd IfIStallCe from !he creek (eigbl feet more than !he original requesI) will provide greatU proIeClloo for !he creek and will _ !be amount of !he variance to !be tIooc area requimnen! by 160 square feet 10 Ibo! !be 1IlIaI tIooc area "" \he site will equal 5.865 square feel. which is 11545 SQWIR fed over lbe ma.:drrn 1m allowed. and 160 square feel .... than !be original 326 square feet requested. The main boose and cottage wilI_ be closer 10 neighboring propenies than ordinarily aDowed and will 00( baye greater YisuaI impact !ban ordinarily alloWed. The graD!ing 0( !be varianc:es, IS CODIfrtioned below. will result in I project whicll """'Plies wid! aD :roning reqWremelltS •• copt tbat • t.eB foot seIba<:t from !be flood canlrol easement line will be prose'" ra!her !ban • tweDIy foot seIba<:t, and !be overall tIooc area 00 !he site will be 166 scjuare feet peaJer !ban ordinarily aDowed. .---, December IS, 1994 Page 2 -. CONDITJQNS 1. The Ihree cu prag. showll on Ihe plaDs stamped ,..,.,ived November 10. 1994 IIIall be rcd!Iced by 160 squano feet (8 wide " 20 deep) 10 tbal Ihe .mac becomes a two car garag. ,..jlll room tor stonge. IDllIhe ".craII size 0( Ihe main bouse becomes S,OOS squano feet. Thi5 ",visioD &ball be submiuod IlIhe time 0( 00ildina permit applkaIioo and shall be subja:l1O !be review and approval 0( Ihe :zoom, Administrator and &ball _ ,.quize • public burlng. 2. The C<>IIIge 11>0"", on 1hc plans stamped ncoivccl November 10, 1994 &ball be movecI .igbI feet SOUllIward. toward Ihe main bouse. resulting in ..... fuoc rear scII>act from Ihe flood COIlItoI eascmeDllinc. Thi5 revision IhaJI be submitted It the time 0( building permit application IDII sbaII be IUbject 10 Ihe R\1cw and approval 0( Ihe ~ AdministnIoc IDII ahaII_ requiR. public bearing. ). Ttees IIWI1bcred 1,2,41D11 S on Ihe plaDs stamped ~ November H), 1994 shall be m.jrl.inffl and protcct<d using 1hc methods outlinffl in Ibe report tltkd: 'Tr= Proservatlon IDII ~ Plan', 5Ubmitted by James M. McClenaban, ASCA, !!alec! October 20, 1994. 4. A permit shall be obIained from Ibe Santa aara vancy Water District prior to comllX'Dmlltlll 0( any projecl construcOoo. S. Ccnstruclion COIIducIed within Ibe city right-<>l-..... y must have • Pennit tor 0msttuc000 in !be Publlc Street. IDII must be IlbIlIWd from !be Department of Publlc Works prior 10 COIIllIlCIUment 0( won. 6. The parldDg ~ tor (>oI:h Ibe main bouse and !be couage shall be COIlStn!CI<4 prior to tinaDins tbe building permit tor the proj«;L USA GROTE :zoom, Administrator Date: December IS, 1994 94-V-IS Igldsk December IS. 1994 Plgd '''', ,;-' This focm 6oeo DOt CODSIiIuJ,e the varlm:e 1« wbkl! applic:a6oa .... made If the appUc'r;o., is approvod and if II<> appal from this decision is flle<l by any pcr50D finn. « CO<p<lnIiOIl affecIat by the decision 00 « by De<:embeo 27. 1994. Y"" wiII m:eive • tq'J of your permit ill the mail. If Ibis app1iea!joIlls not decided to !OUr .. tisfacOoo, /be cIecisIoo =1 be appealed 10 the PI.uming Commlsslon by filiIlg IllIppCOl 1pplic:a6oa VIidIIbo I'Iam>ing DepartmerllIIJd CiIy CIerlt on or before the above DlCIlIioDed ""~. .. :: 94-V-lS IgII1st JooqJI1 M. C"loom. PIaJmer Ms. BasI;" Lee. P.O. &~ ~[892. Pal<> Alto. CA 9430~ Mr. CharIel~. [431 Edsewoc! Drive, Palo AJIo. CA 9430[ 10&. Baonie ~in, 1449 Edgewood Dri"". Pal<> AM. CA 94301 10&. ~ O. McItoe. 1491 Eds .... oocI Drive, Pal<> Ah<>, CA 94301 Mr. Henry Coban. 1415 Edgewood Drive. Pal<> Alto, CA 9430[ Mr. Tom SIoaD, lSS N. Madi:( Street, tl5S. San Jose. CA 9511() ~.JIjuh T. NguyeJl.1451 Edsewoocl Drive, Palo Alto. CA 94301 Deceml>er IS, 1994 Page 4 AppliI:aIi<m No. 94-UP-40: 1~S1 Edgewood Dei~ Use Pmnit 94-UP-40 is approved for !he Iocatlon aDd COOSIruction of • _ living IlDit (COllage) approximately lea feet from !be Ilood coalrol easemenI II !be mor of 1110 property, wbere • twenIy foot SCIba<:t. from !be CtiCmeot IiDc is 0Iherwise ~ired. Canbimd ..;n, 1110 proposed main dwe1liDg. CODSInICtioo 011110 COllage would result in • lOla! fJoo< area of S,865 iIqIlOR f<:et. as per modified pions, ",here S,699.S S<jIIal'O feet is !be "",.imnm 0Iherwise allowed at, 1457 .Edgewood Dei.e, R·l (929) Zooc District, PaJo Alto, Colifomia. Tho project is approved based on !be following findings aDd is subject '" !be COD<!itioos listed below. I. Tho prt>p<>5ed use III !he proposed Iocatlon will DOt be 6ctrimenIal or injurious 10 property or improvements in !he vkinity, and ,.i11 DO( be deb imen/lIIlO !he public heaJth, sar.ty, general ",elWc or convenience, in that, as conditiooed belo,., !he C<JU&ge ",ooId be approximately te. feet from !be edge {)( 1110 Ilood control casemenI liDo aDd approximately Ihirty feci from !be lOp 01 die =et baDk. The increa5cd cIistaJIa: from die =et (eigbt feci ""'"' Ihan die origiDal teqUeOI) WI provide s-= proCectIoo for !be orodt IDIl will reduce !be amount 01 !be variaDce 10 1110 floor ..... requimDenI by 160 square feci so lhal!be lOla! square foocage on !be site will equal 5,865 square feci, whiclI is 166 square feci over Ibc maxllnum allowed, and 160 iIqIlOR feel less than 1110 origln.aI 326 iIqIlOR feet requesl.cd. The main house and COllage will DOt be closer '" DOig."borIng pnlI!Crties than onIinariIy lIIo,.ed IDIl will _ have gICIler visu.al impact than ordinarily all<Jwed. The graJIlina of !be variances, os-conditionecI beIo"" WI result in • prop:. wIrio:It complies ..;n, III WIling requimncms excepe that a ten foot ICIbact from !be Ilood cootroI easemcnI liDo will be present I'8Ibcr than • twcnIy foot SCIbact, and !be overall floor IIIeIl on !be site will be 166 square feci B""""" than ordinarily allowed. Variana: fiDcfings fa< rear ICIbact and fJoo< &roo are addressed in Varimx:e Penni! 94-V-IS. . 94-UP-40.1g 2SOHom;ItcnA""" P.C>b= P""-.CA9OJl 415.-329,2441 .c.s. ]29, 224DF.n De=nbcr 15, 1994 Page 1 -. o 2. The propose4 _ 1I'ill be locat=d IIId ~ in • maDDet in ACCord -..nh the Palo lJto Comprebellsive Plall """ lhe pcupo<eS ol Tit!< 1& of lhe PaJo Alto Municipal Cede. in that """""" livlna UDlIS Itt COQSidcn:d Iffonlahle housing ia I!Je Co<nptebeosivc I'1lm a1Jd are euoourage4 wbote possible, ond ue anc-d by lilt TJtle 18 ollllt Municipol Cede (ZooilIg) .. eon<f!&nally permirr.od ..... 00 I0Io 1="" IlJan 13.000' oquaR f<:et in R-I(929)' zoning c!i<tri<:ts. The IUbject.ire is 16.498 squaR ft:et wiIbout lilt =ok aDd floocl COlItroI eoseme1It ....... AI o4Ilt1 %OIIiJ>I ~ OR """ rill t!>O uception of RaJ IiC1bock from t!>O fJood 00<lIr0l easemout IiIIIO &Dd o--a Ilooc .-011 t!>O lire. Variano:c CiDlfmp fer Ibose two ilaDs are II<Idn:ssc:d in Variano:c Pcnnll 94-V-1S. I. The 1lne car BJI138l' sbowJI "" t!>O plans stamped,..:eived November 10. 1994 sbal1 be lOluc:ed b)' 160 square ket (8 wide x 20 deep) so tbat ibe garage ~ • two ear garage ",i(h room fer storage, and !be overuJ .izJe of lhe main hcwc becomes 5,005 square feet. This ~visioo sbalI be submi1led III lhe lime ol buildi!li pmniI appJlcaOOa IIId sIr&lI be subjocllO !be 10';',. and approval of ibe ZonilIg A4ndni.sInro< ond sbalI !lOt require • public bearing. 2. The ~ sbowa O!J !be pions I1lImpe<I """,Ned No>embcs 10. 1994 sbal1 be mo.....z ei&\lt ft:et "",,-.ro. IOlI'an! Ibe main _. resultlJ:\g ill I t.oa foot rear ietbacIt from the Oaod <ODIl'OI easemc:nt 1iIIIO. This ",vision sbalI be l5Ubmitted It ibe lime of building pmniI oppli<ation add sholl be JUbject 10 the ..mew IIId opproval of ibe Zcmins Administr>uJr and obalI DO( requlR • public bearioa:. 3. TteeS IIUIIIbcn4 1.2.4 and 5 O!J !be ptans I1lImpe<I recei.ed .l'.ovember 10, 1994 obalI be maimjned and ~ ""inS the metbods 0UiIlnec! in tbe Iq>Ort titIe<I: "T...e PIeoecvJIIloa &Dd I'roIection Plan'. submitted by James M. M<:Cknahan. ASCA. daIed O;tober 20, 1994. 4. A j.emm sbal1 be oI>!ainod fiom the SonIa CIaI2 VaIIq WIlU District prio£ 10 (:0171~ at any project coostNcIio<L • Number """,0&4 on Pebriwy 15, 1995 10 ICCQtIdeIy n:flec;t tbe requimDenI foe !be It -1 (929) zaning district. D«;cmbcr IS, 1994 Page 2 , '. ' .. s. CoostrucIioa ~ within !be city rig/X-ci·WlY musI have I Permit fur . CoasIrUCtion in die Public Street. ml mll5l be oI>Iained from die Departmem of Public Works prior 10 COIIIII>!IlCelDnl of wod. 6. The parIcing requlJod fur boa. tho main !>owe and !be COIlag •• baIl be ~ prior 10 finaIling !be bui!dins permit fur die project. 0~~R USAGRO'IE ZooiDg AcIminisIraID< Date: Decomber IS, 1994 l"1Us furm does DOt constilute Ille use permit fur ",hick applkation ,.... made If Ille app!ication is approved and if DO appeal from this ckcision is fiJed by any person fll'll1, or c:orpontion affected by !be ckcisiOll on or by December 27, 1994, you wiIi receive 1 copy of yoor permit in !be mail. If this application is DOt ckcicled 10 your satisfaction, !he ckcisioa may be appealed 10 the Planning Commission by filing an appeal oppflC.1tion wiIIl !be Planning Department and City Clerk 011 or before die lbove menlioued date. «: Joseph M. Colonna~ P1a:nner Ms. Bassie Lee, P.O. Box 51892, P:Ilo AlrD, CA 94303 Mr. CJw:Ies ~VC1lS, 1431 Edgewood Drive, P:Ilo Alto, CA 94301 Ms. BoIinie Stcin. 1449 Edgewood Driv., P:Ilo AlrD, CA 94301 Ms. R<JbeIu G. MclCee, 1491 Edgewood Drive, Palo AlrD, CA 94301 Mr. Henry Cohan. 1~15 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Mr. Tom SIoaD" 15S N. Mmet St=t. I2SS, San Jo<e, CA 95110 Mr. Binh T. Nguyea. 1451 Edgewood Drive, P>loAIto, CA 94301 94-UP-40Jg .' -- December is, 1994 Page) .-, ". -:., ~, ~ crrtOFPALOALTO 0 OI!lCI 01111. ell)' CIetf< , APPEAl. FROM TrlS OECISIOH OF ZONING ADIIINJSTRATOft To b6 aid In d'upliea't1! within ter'I cfays from date d deCisIon d 2enfng Admfn1stralor Reoeipt N<> (N -11 b Phone (1//$1 3~4 ~,..~ -'2. QII, '~~t11 ZIp LOCAJION OF PROPERTY: AssessoI'I Parcel No. ()~?!. //-f , 3 Name d Property Owner (if oIher lhan .ppeI1anQ _...!1a~I!J"'(.,tI!t-_T!.-'o' -1,lYUlSuvl!.ypt.!!"J.NIL. ___ _ r-.opertyOwner'IAdd<ess IJtn, fiOG-cw..,p J>I>, ,I'-+Ib",a, e.<I, ~'I'3C' ~~ ~ ZIp PlANNING COMMISSION RECCMMENOATKlN TO THE CITY COUNCIl: 0.0 _________ ___ CITY OOUNCIL OEOSlQN: DMe ______ _ RemaI1cs andl'" Concfrt;ons: SU8MlTTAL REQUIREMENTS SATlSFlEr> t. ~ '" 4. 5. Appmved---Denied ____ _ 12jS9 , .;;. ,-. RESIDENTS' ~I' TO PROTECT EDGEWo!;J DRIVE FROM OYERBUllDlNG Petition to Palo Alto City Council Reference Variance Request 94-V-lS -. We, the undersigned resldents oC the 1400 block oC Edgewood DrIve, Palo Alto, petitioI' the Palo Alto City CouncIl to reject Variance Request 94-V-I S_ This variance would Involve the coostructioD at 1457 Edgewood Drive oCtv.'<> structures, a large, SI67 square foot sing!e-famlly resldence, plus an 860 square foot s"""net residence, on one lot. The combined flooc area oC the two resideoc .. , totaling 6027 square feet, will exc~ the FAit limits fur this property by 327.5 squ.re feet, O£ almost 6 'lfL This property, one ol the smaller Io!s on the block. !w.s very recently cbanged hands. The np.:w owner intends 10 raze the existing reside:x:e~ and construct the two new homes by encroaching into ti'Je rear setb4X:lc... We. are deeply -concerned abc:>ut ~s12.btishi'Og new precedents for density (){"n. .. 'Gidence ... llool' areas in our neigh 'borbood. The City of Palo Alto has established the f.A.R. ruie in order to prevent unsightly overbuilding on residential lots. We ask that )'OU refuse 10 permit tbe flouting of these rules when it is dear that nQ hardship exists. fl is obvious that the lot wa.s purchased M-th lhe intention of seeking a vari.ance to build larger floor areas than Palo Alto's fkx>r area regu!uoons pcrmiL Print nOl;me Signature Street Adaress ;,-, RESIDENTS'\\OUP TO PROTECT EDGEWtJD DRIVE FROM OVERBUILDING Petition [0 Palo Alto City Council Reference Variance Request 94-V-lS We, !he undersigned r",idents of the 1400 bloc}. 0( Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto, petition !he PalvAltl> City CoundllO reje<:t Variance Request 94-V-15. This variance would involve the construction at 1457 Edgewood Drive 0( ""0 structures. a large,S 161 square foot single--ram~y residence, plus an 860 square foot smaner residen ... -e? on one 1ot. 1be combined tJooc are. 0( the two residences. totaling 6027 square feet, will exceed the fAR. limits for this property by 327.5 square reet. oc almost ~ 96. This property, one 0( the smaller lots on the bloclt, bas very recently changed hands. The new owner intends \0 raze the existing residence, and construct the two new homes by encroachIng int-o the retlr setback.. We are deeply concerned about es!abnshing new precedents Joe density 'Of. reslde:nc-e floor areas in our neighborhood. The City of PiJ.1o Alto ~s estabtished the F.A.JL rule in order-to-prevent unsightly overbuilding on residential lots. We ask that you refuse \0 permit the flouting of thEse rules when it is dear t..ltat no hardship exists. It is obvious that the lot was purch3.$ed with the intention of seeking a variaoce to build larger floor areas than Pl!lo AItds floor o:rea reguJations permlt. -~~ --;-, ' : .: '" 7 - -- February 8. 199~ Me. JoseplI M. C'oIc>nna PWmiDg Divisioo City of Palo Alto Pose Office Box 10250 Palo AI!o, CA 94303 Dear Me. 00I0nna: n .'-....., • ..--. P.e: ~~,::~,~Woler~ 6 SAN JOSe, C~ "11.~ rel..e:~ !408J 2E5-2'5OC FACSrM:'IL£ (408'.' 2S6~~t RECEIV/!.!) FES 0 91995 The DisIrict !laS re-."iewed !he reviled silO plan for !he Nguyen residence located at 1457 ~cwooc! Drive, PabAlto, APN 003-11.067, File 94-UP..:o, received b).s on I>Iluary 12. 1995. San FraDcisquilO Cred<, a DisIrict flood <ODtro! tacun}" runs lhrougll !he rear portion or !his site. The sitE would not be S\Jbjee11O flooding in the event or • I perce.l! flood. The DisIrict bas a fIooc! cootrol .... ment across the 'ear portion cl Ibis site to .r",,,, for the improvement and maintrtJan<. of the creek. The si~ plan adequately""''''' the 1imlt5 or Ihe oatrict's tasemem. The IoC:iiioo ol the proposed fUeS' cortag. is acceptable 10 the District. Upon rectip! of final clevek>pmem plans, the DiS1ricl will issue a permit. T'O'o se<s of final development plans s1!ould be SCIll for _ review and ~ of • permit prior 10 Ihe SQrt of coostT1ICIi<ln. A1!.y quesIioGs /!lOy be referred 10 me at (408) 265-2607, clI/en;ioo 2319. JUchard M. AncIer"sor. AssisWIt EDgineet II Desip Coordination Divisioo ex: Mr. Tom Sloan Metro Desip Group ass Noah Market Street. Suite 25S San Jose. CA 9511() ,,--' ,>--"'. - .-.... ~ ID. ~~40, 1451 mGEW::x:Il DRIVE lIPI"..ICIIl"lCIl K>. 94-V-J 5, 1451 EDGI!IOD IJiIYE . '. . , -'';'.,. .. -. : .' """ _ t 94-1JP-tO and """lance 94-V-15 are approved to< t1le locallon and ocnstruct1"" of a ~ Ilvinq unit {oottaQel appcoxinetely ten feet trail t1le flood caotrol ......,.,.,t at t1le rear of t1le p<q>erty. W>ere a twenty toot oetbaclt fl<lm tile ........",t llne is othan<l Be re<1U!red. CO!il; ned Wi th the JlE'<lPC)8ed min _I lIng. OCIlStnx:tlan of the cottage >ot>\ll<! result In a total flo<>< area. of 5.865 square teet. as per orodjtied plans. ~e 5.':19.5 square feet Is the naxlm.m ot1lerwise allowed .. t. 1457 F.dqew:>od DIe ive. 11-1 19291 Zone District .. Palo Alto,. Cillifornia. Lisa Grote: The applicant i'i pt"oposinq to d€l'1Ulish the existing sing~e-faIl',jiy WJse and oor.struct a ne.ot lNlin resi.dential awell ing under a separate permi t. ThIs is-also categorically exerpt fran the California EhVironrrental CU-ality Act. Is the applicant here on that application? Of".ay. Are you. the applicant? 5>. 1'11\ the a..ner of the pr-operty and lffi archi teet -wi 1 i :be here shortly (0 repl"e5ent me. Lisa Grote: Okay. There are a couple of things that we need to discuss. I beUeve ~ received a letter today as1<i.no for .continuance of this hearing".. Let me read that to you 50 you are,cr...are of it. it's dated NoveTber 17th~ it'd oirected to Joe CoIOl"l1)C!J;...mo is 'Sitting acrerss frC1"Ll Ire. It &a:ts~ -D'la:nk you for our OXlversatioo this m:>rning ill \oihlc:h yot..;. explcmed to D'e nrt leoal rights concerniru; the de'lelopre.'1t of the prope!'t'!l a hcluse ~NiJ..y fran me at 1451 Edge..Iood. 1 had intended to be pcesent at the public hearing today.-but find tl1at I am unable to attend. I am., t.herefor-e, requesting a continuation of this hearing so that I IlBY have time to renew the plans at the city hal1 and \oI":.ich Wi l! al so (live ue and severa 1 of my ne iQl'lbxs another chance to. be present at the meeting. I wiJJ say I am cpposed to a variance of the flood control easemant at the rear of the property. If the ,Project we~e scaled dcw'l. a bit to t.1)e range ol. 4. to 5 thousand square feet there would be no need tor this variance+ I find t.'1a Pt'oject especIally untenable since the house must si t siOO->,..oeys on -1 - ~."Ic7~r:~~---~--, • , ", .';;"', '.0------- .~- L[sa Gl'ote: Okay. Thank yoo. The laCy In the blacK with U-,e white turtleneck -..,.,ld you lilt. to speak? ~ CO?\an: Q'ace Yano. asked :re to just speak on tier behalf.. He:-cc·ncern 11 that bel: "house is rigflt ne.v.:t do;)r-to the pt"qpos.ed builchn~ constructioc., and: ahe's <:x.ncerned: that there OO\lld be an inva,siCl':! of privacy 1n te.rtT'$ of reducUoo in privacy visually fran the ne.l structure. So I'm sure she 'WOOtd ll~e to evaluate and rev1ew the plans that wo\lld"be subnitted. Ll sa 9rot,e ~ acay. Has she had a ct-.a.""\Ce to'? 'We do ha\I'E! a copy of the .p! ar.,S • If you'd Ute to 0CITe up and ta'ke a looK. we can PlJt then CNer here. First. ltd like to ask if the architect \oOuld 1 i):e to SlJ'}' ar.ythlno for the CWler1 Wa have 'had a request foe cor.t1nuance of: the public hear-in<} in ~der to aUcw JrOr'e nel.;Jhbot"s to looK at the plan!J'O["e -closely. We recelvee a letts!" toC:ay and also one of the neiQhbccs is here to say tl1at she hasn't t.ad e.'iOUgh titre to really eonsider the plans and tall:: wit.""\ the appllc3Jlt and his a..!"chitect to di$CUSs \rI\at'"s beinc;l pr-ClPOSed. !'here is another 9entlem:n here W-IQ "has ;radoE the statarent that he"' net in fa\.'OC of t'he plans of the: proposals;.. So:> -wr.at: 1'(1 lite to do is offer the archltect an cp;x>rtW'"lity to respond to -:.nos.e: conce..""115 riQf" .. t now-~ and then perr.:aps indicate if yoc -...,.o:..l.Id aqc€-e "''1~n. tr,e cant inuance~ Tan Sloan:. I'm Tan SJoan~ the aIcYlitecL \.ihat I'd like to 00 is. if it ccr, be possible in this forom. rm in favo:x of contin .. anq it. 1:1 other \oIOrC5 1 ' •• :e don~t -..ant to CCITIE! in with this pt'oject If the people have .;uesttons~ we ;...;::,. ... t to be able to answer those ri~t now. Is there sare tor-elm ~ere .. 'IS can do that? Li.sa Grote~ I thl:nJt that !Me 'Call. Actually, \IJE! s'hould pcobably continue the \oI)ole di5CUSSiOCl foE' boO 'Weeks~ and then allow you a.."l q::poctunilY to oather with the nelQhbx's that have oonce.rns. '!here are a few of them here right DO.i .. and there~s also Bonnje Miller Stein. looho lives at 14~9 ~ Drive. Wo wrote in; \ol'x> (Ji!Ne us a letter saying she l'~d serre concerns abcrl.1t it and 'Wanted to-talk to-you alxxJ.t it and look at the plans. So I l.IOUld 'N2nt tC' -3 - continue the hearlnQ to a date certain to Oive you that tL~ them. Ian. SlM;1: OKay. Fi ne. Lisa Grote: Okay. We'll ~tinue thjs it6l:\ then to OecEl!i::leI: L i9§. p.m .• and it wlJl be In tne Councll OXlference RXin. Which Is out ty Jtf!etir>q area; ~ich is the roan next door~ 1'hanits. -4 - •• , •• 1 ~. U:D., ..... J •• 1 •• \.! J l1'. "," .- ~~, I'd like to bo>;rln the _ I. 1194 Zooinq Mnlni.trato< Hearlnq4 11m Lisa Grote,. the City of palo Alto Zoolno Admin!stratoc. 01 DT.i rioht Is Joe COlama, Sen].or-Planner in the Planning Division. Today we l"-..ave Bve It_ (II) the aqenda. SO we are QOi!lC] to try to!r<l'.'e thrOU<;lh it q-"i<lt1y. The first one Is a oontlnuecl item fran two weeks 000 at 1451 Fd\l&'OOd Dri .. e. Ihe process fo.-today is that the awllcant will be invited to give. bcief S\m'iTe.ry of their .Proposal .. then people fran the aodien...---e either in favor of or ~ to the awlicat ion Wi II be inVited to speak. The."'1 1o.Ie' U have sare dia.l00ue if that's necessary talking about coodi lions of approval oc possiblO! conditions. l'hen I'll close the public nearIng and I have ten -days to issue a written deten:nInati,on. If you want to recejve a. copy of that \4"i tten detenninatlon. :please fU] out a 'White card and we' lJ put it in. tr.e file; and yoIJ',U autanatloal iy receIve a copy of the (teterminatioo. If you~re on the appllcatloo fODr\.. YOIJ don~t need to fill out the "\ollite card. you'll get one alltcrnatically." WiW!'1 ten dayS of that fNI"itten detenru.nation if you·re not happy wi th the detenninat ion 0[" one of the oondi t l'ons of appccval,. you can appeal Jhe decislcn to t.M Planning' .camussion. T"nat 'Wi II then 90 on to the City Councu as well. And that aweal II'llSt be in writIng. So 'With that we'll stort with our first it.." \otllch IS 1457 E)jg"""">d Il<!ve. It's for a Use PetnUt; tt's 94-UP-40 and 9t-V-19~ It~s an appllcatlon foe a conditional use .Pem1 t and vari ance fcc the location and cons truct ioo of a ~eoond liVinq unit proposed to be ]'ocated directly adjacent to a flood coo.trol ea..serrent at the rear of the property. 'Where a bJenty foot setback is otherlolise required. l'hat's o:rti:Ilned with a prqposed .min dweJlinq unit. and construction of a cottage ~tch ...ould result in a total flCJCX area of 115.021 square feet \J"Iere 5.Ei99.S square feet is the IT'alCimJm allCJWed. The aWl icant is also pr-OJ)OS:i:no ~~ derolish the existing sillQ'!e-fam1Iy house and construct a a new Irein resi,&lntial unit under a separate permit. I 'WOUld like the applicant to care fOl"War'd and .qiw a brief S\ll'1lTltrY of. the appIicat ion and thEn perhaps surmarioz.e the dlscusslcn that oocurred between the neigh!)oc. and yourself. ;00 I do - 1 - ' .. I . ,-_. .--.. ..., .- ?lave a couple of letter. that I have received just toOsY that I ><ill need to enter into the record . Tom SI""", It.' name I. Tan Sloan and I'm tl,. architect f~ the P<">Ject. Lisa Grote, I do need to uk l'O<> to 1'1_ be quite, 50 we can hear Ll)e _tatl"". lbanJt you. ran. Sloan: "What we are a;pJying for is I use .PemJ.t. flrst of. all. to construct a quest !louse, \oIUch Is locat~ in the rear of L'le property. It Jr8etl the (root liet1:eck and certainly the side setbAcks that .are required. Where we do need II. variance 1. foe the rear setback encroactJrent. Thls right here 111 the proJ:lQrty Une, ard noorally -..a-at you w:;)Uld t.a.ve if there -..as not a creak tJ".rou;#>. here and the _to this """,Id be the 2O-foot setback. So essentially that structure. It'eet all the. setback r~irerrents-Bot ~t we are required to by city ocdinance is take setbac:Jcs frem an e&s~c line 'Nhich is esser.tlallyanother setback. So tha~ puts "U.S beck this distance -40 plus a.not.ner 20 -requires us to act'Jally to have about a t'D-foot setback fran tr.e ~ property line. SO this is essentially ....tJy -wePre asicing foc a variance. nte other thiliQ that happens here: is because this sq.:are f:Y'--tage ...tlich is 2500 square feet of area. If \role we..-re to-calC\liate that into the equation foc how I1lICh house ... -.3 quest house we <X><Ild build, "'" would really no': be asl<!nq fore a varIance at" all because this a...-ea is deducted fran t"t.re allcwab-ie lot area_ 50 flnd!r>;I n..mer <»e. that ~ hav<o to haw saootlllt>;l unIque aboIlt tlle property 11 certainly nt. In factp a stream on the site is actually -outlined in the 2iOnlnq QUldebooic. as one of the reasons you could ask for a varia.lCe~ Secondly. in ~t ing: the variance pit says here "'based on the uni quene.ss of the lot.. the property a...ner does not ~ the sa.-re develOprent r1 ;hts a.s OWlerS of t}'J:Iical lots~ certaInly the nel~s on the Sl.llre side of E.dqewxx:l ~i"". heve the creel< runninq throuf;jh the baclt of thel r po-operty. But wha t '-'" Is the creel< modulates in and oot of people's po:operty. So essentially the easeoont is unusually Iar;e at th.is lot "Where ot..'ierwise it tapers the street;: it tapers do..n very narrow. So -wePve oot an unusually large seetlon. here. And the neighbors across the street really are nei~s oot yet they do hOt nave thjs penaltyp if you"WilJ p -0::1 tr-.eir prQtleI"t'f. So I -~ - dO beHeve this is ur.lque to this Pt'opertY'~ Alld the third fjnding ~ .. t yoo lTIlSt qrant. in ~ to Qrant the vari.a."1Ce is the varia.'lCe will r.ot be detrImental to the 6'.lI'I'c:1nding pcoperty o..ners or resldence~ Essentially, we are rreetino the 5ide setback requirerTer".ts 60 iC6 vur contention that \oJe are not unduly ilTpacting the nel\lhbOrs on eitller side. 1.isa: Grote: acay~ 'I'hanlt yOU very lIllC,,"'. ),re there I!'EI'Ii:lers of too audience that woulQ like to. speak to this-application"? If you could st.art with YO\U' Dame and address. Bass:1e Lee: Okay. I'm Bassie Lee~ !'If, at 1210 .Dana Avenue ",",,ioo is in crescent ParTl:. the general nel<;t.botJood; and I I\c..., Jtn<:ro.m the ~Ie \b> want to bu~ I d the house foe Oller t en years llOIoJ'. They are very decen t peep 1 e and. very loving farn11y~ And the reason tor the ouest house is foe hjs pare.'lts Rho my visit than. frClTl. tine to titre~ kid so trey 'WOuld like to 1"Ia'.J'e a quest house avaU al::le for' that pu:;x>se. And Asi an peop I e tend to taJce care of thej r elderly. and so that ~s t.l)e reason he ~ld like to but ld tl'le quest houss~ And I revj~ the plan and 1 thoug...,t that it's beautiftl,1iy put t~et..l)er~ ~ I'm in support of i t ~ kith ~: Yes~ Keith .P.c:~eI."'tffin. rve. ~ the 2.p;lHeants fot' aOOut 5 yea..""'8 J)OW' and he"a; very interested in rovinq to Palo Alto and thl;;. ..nIl be his prLTar.l residence. Ar..d. avain~ as he 5aid~ the quest tows€. is priIra.rily to! his parents -leIlo are al:out 'S years -ar.d so he can take care o-f t.han in their old _. ~ Speaker frem the Audj~~! Hay -1 ask trIE! .Q1.air. does this bulli!lnQ have a kitchen in it? LIsa Cllyte, Yes it Io<>UJd. ~ Speaker: So it could be used as; ~ rental uni n Lisa Grote~ It could be used as a rental 'miL -3 - •••••• ,. \-P'" .II~' •• I. •• \ 1:111." "' .. - ---~;/ " "" -.... : ... 1.1sa Grot., It 10 pennissible. Ihore i. adequate lot size there. It does need tl>e oondltla>al use permit, but it is. permitted u.e. Is tJlere anythln;l else 'iOU'<\ like t<> say? U'lJtna,n S!?eakep .I ..... just WCl"Jderjnq if the SantI) Clara lillter District has opp<oved the easement becaUse cl the tact the t the cot tall" very well may j~djze the stallj I i ty cl the 14nd there. I think tllat should be looked Into. Lisa. Grote: ltioht. !he santa Clara water v'i'$trict did receive a C'OPY o.f the . ·p!ans. They <I!d 1001< at it. Ul._ Speaker, l\r1d wl\at did they say? Lisa. -Grote: their resjXlf'l5e is -1')J 6l..J1TttiU"i:ze this -"the DistrIct has a flood control ea.se-nent ac.toos the rear poctIon of the site to alJo.r foe inprC1lJBTlBllt and maintenance of t11e creek. The }i.znlts of the easement should be shc:w-J: -on the J.tal"lS~ l€JIC.; t"hey are. It says -U".e District will need to assess the irrps.ct the proposed quest hou$e 'W'i II })ave on the stab-i Ii ty o-f the .creek banks~ and that they \t.IOlJ.:i.d do that pric>: to the start of -constructioo~ pcicx to. the issuance of the bui Id"'rlq penni. t" ~ rney don' t rai se red fl ags 0: <XlflCer1lS • ~ Spe§ker: They haven't gotten the 'piM 'lotlere t.~ easarent line cernes in. T'nat's W'ly they haven't raised any red. ilaQS yet. !>isa <;rote: It is ~ understa..'1dinQ \:.hat they teceived a -copy of. thiS plan°. We routed it to t.hEIP.. If you 'WOULd like to look. at this plan. YOU"re-...-e1C<J:"(e. ~ 5peaker: I sp.:»:e to Hr. Anderson yesterday~ He did not receive the plan wi th the easement 1 ina. -4 - -. Joe COlonna: I've spoken ..nth him. and he w-a.s satisfied aaer talking witl-t roe the first tine that the plans had be.n sufficiently chanoed because he did send me a~" of the ~t descripti«t. 1 Detched. that up -...r:ith this plan set. He-will receive another set of pl~""'.S at that W'liJ EihcAJ the easemarlt and wilJ also &> the enoineeri1\O Of'l the project to ma);e sure that the bank is stable ~ or-that there·s further rreasures that the aWl icant has to take to stoblll"" the bank f"" the project. . ~ Spea)!:er't I'd just li:ce-to say sanethlnQ" else that may not have anything tc) do With the stab!!it. of the land. but the house that is being deroHshed is no nrxe: than 2.(lOO~ 2~5Oi) feet. The new house plus the cctta~ i.E over 6.000~ .and 1 thif'lJt that should be taken into consideratico. It happens to be the s;mallest house 00 the block .. ~.)Ject-wiser and it €\.~I'} nart'CMS in the bael(. Jo.nd the house has to"!le P'J,t side...-ays 00. the proy€.rty. So it Will tle t;..o stodes sideways on t1'le .Property fra; the very frOf'l;: e-j.;e to the vary back eo3Qe cf the Jlr~rty. And I know it fits in tI1e ie;Gi }imitations. but there are ways of skirting: the le9S-1 limltatioos .. a.~ that':; why you see houses around Palo Alto that ar.e far in excess of the 5126 tr.O?Y sh::4l1d be foc the lot. That~s trri" f~li.n<;f about it. And as noE!lc]hbccs \o..'e hc·.re to-live With the aesthetics of the $ituat~on. !hat"s a typi·:::alh" "\'e!""! . , special. WJndp..rful lot in Palo Alto. and I think. "We should be. very ca!eful about that, Lisa Grote: Thank you. Could I get your name arrl address. Bonnie Steig: .MY name is Bonnie Stein and I J Ive t~ doo!"s ~ at g~9 Elqewxld Il!"!ve. Han"k~: I have sare ccrnren.ts. If 'NJ. don~t mind. I'll use notes so I can keep ~se1f oco;a.ni2ed. .My narre is Hank Cohan. I live at 1425 Edge..lOOd. This pccperty chanQed hands wi thin the last four rrontl".s. Certainly the buyer ~ t!"j€ DeW' OttIler. \o.oaS a"lo.lare of the various restr.i.ctiOils on it. ThE: fact that the rear lot,. "Wiich is substandal:d. and. the lot has a "excessive" setback -5 - ~ ." .' .. requ1r9'TlBr1t eerta.5nly si)OUld have been ~ to the new o..mer.. I"t 's c.ovio-;.s that thls person purct~ tnl. lot 1rJ full expe<::cation a .... 'a..tia..'1ce ~ld be 9t'iIl1ted. The ~ J. not be.!nQ' faced loo1th new' and ~ restrict.!OflS. He sho\lld /11M! kllo..n the NStrlctions 10llen he I:>OUQht tI>a p>=ty. Finelnq 3 - U"~is variance-r~t if ~ted rreJi:,* a. t!OCkery of Palo Alto's 2On1.nq reQUlatlCflS. l'eq>le b.ly hanes 1n the belief that the :>on!nll r&9\>latloru; will protect their interest In the future. If granted thiS variance viii be<:<m2 a closet 1_1 p<..:e3ent that can be utilJ:ed I>y in the future I>y anyone \00110 wishes to-clr~oent t.~ Nles. His propo-sed st.ructure~ -which is cal led the quest cottage .. ltifUch"has a floor area o-f 860 square feet .. t~ bedroc:ms r livinQ roan. .dinII'lq area .. kitc~ and one bath .. is hardly a QUest COtt4ge. There are many tw::rbed.roan <XIl1dos in Palo Al to t.hat are srrelJer than this. 1i<;f,.; Cai1. the applicant state tM.$ quest cottaQe 'Will never be used as a rental unit? !he property (:an sold next year and t..""Je present app1 jcant has 00 coouoi CAfer the: ne--Puyer. F\Jrthe..nn:xe. now I und-=rstBJ'1d that re..""ltal un~ts are ~eQ'al. i.A:.t the staterrent is rrede in the request foe the varia.'1CB anc r,rcr:Lised thar. t.,is property 1oJi1i never be us.OO as a. rental unit: a.."lC Ll'\a.t's a tiSS1J-e in ~!'1.i.n air. And as a D'Eltter of fact, at the last treeting-of this hearing. tJ".e ne'J o....ner told me rulfl$elf that he is building ttle place not: as a cuest house. b:~t as a heme for: hi5 rrother and father. They are not: 9OWC;: to be there Ir;£) ti..-ne to tima; they"re goinQ to be there all th! tiru=. I'll conclooe by sayj4 r"d . like you to consider the-lrrpac-t of tMs request. !he za'oir-.g and bu!.c~nQ regulatiatS that have been put into place in Palo Al to after so t1'xh COll$ideratlOl'l and pianninQ' • .MG.~: the reason I said earlier nay'be fran titre to time 1s becau-se his parents do have '.children altoqet.her. and the parents do Jive vith dlff&ent ehHdren at different tlmas. As fa as rentl~ it as a rental piece of property~ I have lncwl Ben and rina fO( IiCre trlil.'""I 10 years and they ~;;: VBry. very suCC6SEifll! business people, and financially they i?lre quile 'WeU-'to-Oo. So II'r¥ opinion Is --I never thought that they ~ld entertain the iae~ of renting that, but beino then that they'"re r,ot herora~ I can speak. that th-3!:-" -6 - \oOUld not 1'lave the Inten·tioo of dolnq it for fjnancial rea&.:.fls. 50 that is the pc Int I wan ted to make. Lisa Gtote: 1'hanks. Is they anyone else? OlarIes Stevens: Yes. rJR Olarl:es Stevens fran 1431 Edqew:od Dri'ol'&. and I just wanted to say that I'm in total agreement wit.i-a the objections that Ra,rlJc CdIan has just voiced. Bobe.rtQ5~'. ~~: You didn't take m; na. .. ·'r2. ~rta G. l1cK'*i t '1'1\ at 14S1 ~ Dr'lve. And 1 agree v.i th Mr. Cohan al so. You ca."lIiOt QUa.J':antee tha t the .next-door l10use will not be using the cottage as a rental unit. Lisa Grote: thank you. There we.re two letters tnat I received tills Il'Ctning by fax. (he is fran Linea Elkind \oIho 15 'W!'iting-1:1 ~-osHjon ~o the ' .... ariance request and use permit request. She says '"It''S cur U!"'.ciersta.Y'Jdlnq that the applicant seeks a varla."1CE to construct a house and q>.lE:St cctl';a~ so that the doIelJiflQ! ccnStructioo -..rill oane withio 20 feet of l:'1e tct" of the bari/{. "Sc:n Franci$q'.lito creek berJts are eJCtrernely steep at ~js section. P;r.:Y.)l.;;r.-s ... i til tulStab!e ban):s are evident by the presence of sandbaQ JiniOQ.· Shra talks about -...mat if the sandbaQs fail. Furthe.....~e, ther~ 15c strong pub1.:.c s.:.~'O!t in Palo Alto fcc the use of environmenta:liy SO'.Jl"Jd bank stabilizaticn techr..iques. FOl' the. record and foe )fOI.lr CQl"lsldouation. p~ecose: de."lY tr.e app!icattoo fO€ a varIance fOf' tf..is project." Then I receIved another lEtter fran Dena Mossar fran creeks coal i 1100 in Santa Ciara Courl.ty-also in. ~Ition to the variance request. She ·str·:>nqly 5UppOI't!S t.~ pr·,.tection of ri.l)arian habitat and streams. The CoalHion urges Ire to de .. "lY the request for a varia.."1Ce:. 'the siting of the guest house 'Will likely darrage the redwood and bay trees at the back of the pcoperty. These trees are-esse!ltial [Of; long term bank stabilization and hab·i tat protection. l'hough the ba.nk is currently stabilized by sand bags .. .sand haQs do not last indefinitelY and cou1d faiL ~ bank is steep. and high". So they are also in opposition. 1 ~ld li'.-e to - 7 - .. I..,.! '.';1: •• 1 .,.'-1 •• u,. \J :till .... • c-· .. u1t the ~u.cant if you have looked into the health cl these trees and ask an a:-boctst's opinion about tbe L~t of the -constructioo on the trees~ rem. Sloan: We prepared an ar1x>rlst r.eport. so we've taken a 1oc..Jt at the rIparian area as well as the back, and lde11tified by nllWer the tree and it'. exIstIng c::cndltlon. and S".;ooest9d lIhat 'oNe can do because they 'Wa."':It to prarot~ that further 91"owth. It'e !olla.ed by a set of q.;.idelines. Lisa ~e~ (lkay. A..'1d this <foes lncillde guidelines tl".a.t the arl::lr:Y-ist feels ...ould protect the tree6? kisa Grote: Jlnd you would not rave oejection:i if tnose -were to becar.e c:ondi tiOl'lS of approval l' Tan Sloa..'P"J.:: No. certainly net ~ "As a l!Ste:r of fact;. na,.i requested that hE: make tho&e reo:::mnendatl,OfiS. Lisa ~! Alri;ht. T."'len I \ .. I'i11 take this uncle:-ccnsiderat::oo and issue a written determination 'Within 10 days. and if yoo'd like a ~y~ ~lea:se fill out a W':llte card. And with tho:=t I'll: close ptibl1C ~raSaIi.nq if there are no _' other QCmJ"Bnts r ThanJt you. -" - A'ITACHMENT 7 Letters in Opposition to Project Itoo. _ (;010=_ P 18f1Jlh, Oep3.l"t:Den t Cirie. Cent • .,. 2SO H~lton Avenue Palo AltO' .. 0.514301 Bell%' Hr. Colanna: lONNIE r.m.ID. $TUN l+O~Orl:~ p .. lo Aho. California 9-430 1 --.-" RECEIVED NOV 17194 ~&., ... ::~~ Thursday .. No· .. emet' 17. 1994 Thank you for our CODVerS2.tiC'D tlUs )loming iB. which you ex plained tG me ~ legal rights coDcerain, the development of the pTCperty • bouse "IJ)IIa1 from De a.t US7 EdSewood. 1 :had iBtended: to be present at t'he public heari11.g today. but find t.bat I atI unable to, attend'. I am .. there-fore .. request.i:Ag It continuation of tAis lh::.arlng so that I aay bave time to' re Yin the plans at 'the-c1 t1 b-.ll and -..;hlch .... ··ill &lso give "Ile and several of .., .neighbors another cllance to be pTeselJt at the meeting. I. wiU s.ay ( am. .opposed to a variance of the flood control ease.aent at the rear of the property. If the project -were seal'!.! down II bit to the :m.llllndxn range of 4: to, S thousand .$C\.uare feet there wculd be no need for tJd.s varianc(;:. I find the project especia.lly uotenallle since the house IlUst sit side tiays OIl the property since the frcotage is about: balf that of JK)st -of the hauses on tlIis blott. and a two~.5tory that goes bad that. far will be unsightly as is the house lJcxt to it .t 1455 tor .niCk ~e ~ere not i2vited to a public hearing. tt'"s possi!lle that Mr~ Sloan nbtb this is perms·sible .siilce 1455 is built that ~a.y but I'. Dot entirely sure tlLis is with:=: ia legal limits. {I .ill also researca the buildiDI of tAis house which J 'Dever knew vas lIlY rigbt to do~ Please adviae-as t1li the F1"Ojected De~t public hearina:~ lba.1'J.l: you .. Sincerely yours. Ih.-i Jr«.' Bonnie Maller Stei. - , ,-.. ~' Cti'l'CfFAU1J<lTO.C.l. l+"~Dd~ CITY CLERK'S Dr-neT ,;"., AJtg, CL1umill S4)OI 9S J.~'! /I Ali 9: 53 .January 6 .. 1995 City Council of Palo Alto Civic-Center Jl' F. r.~'Vl"ri JMJ 10 1995 2SO Hamilton Avenue Palo A.lto .... CA 94301 C/JY mAGEl'S MOO Subject! 1451 Edgewood Drive: Variance f94-V-lS Dear Sir/Ma.daD.: This letter is i~ response to three let~ers we received today from :members of the Jlguyen family. ~---Primarily. it 1Ilust be clear that 'the petition which \ias sub mitted to the Council was not simply the registration or a com plaillt froll !lie but rat..'l.er the. representation of the majol'ity <jf fi11Uiliu. liY:i1l.g on. Edge..-ood OTive • .I.lso .. of equal importance .. it must be "known that our iJlitial ob jections to the requested variance a~re based solely on esthetiC ~ds. The let.t.ers reeeived imply tltat darke? (perl\,aps racial and ethnic:: issues) .or selfish ignor<Ult motives pr~ted our peti tion to deay the variance~ We strongly object to the implied .criticisms tItst It''f! are mean~isted' .. prejudiced homeoWTieT"S~ la addition to thes~ broader issues is Tom Sloan's erroneous state· lDI:ot 'that our -objections 'Were. based: on our aversions to the noise of ~anstrvetion and to tbe buiI~1 of &~other cottage &ltogetbe: on tJo.is street. ~o OQ! .ho signed: the petition including gu.rselves has Ely objeclion to ei'ther of these concerns. I trust tkis matter can be brought to a sensible and peacef~l 501u tion~ We welcome the ~guyen family i~ all good spirit even if we object to the design of their pl~~ed con£t~ctiQn. Tkis is a de_ocratic process and the implication of unfriendly motives is simply tlot stmtaillaDle. CC: Tom Sloan Lisa Crote lir.h , Tien ~guyeQ Vert truly yours~ ~~J-.-~ Sonnie MilleT Stei~ ~Grole Zoning AdministralO( Ci!y 01 Palo Alto Planning 06parlmenl o Dena M0$$3.r 1024 Emerson Palo Alto, CA 9430 1 Oeoomber 1, 1994 The Sarlla Clara CounIy Creeks Coardion strongly supports Ihe protection 01 lipar'.an habilal and streams, and is particlJ!arly concerned \hal San Francisqufto Creek be preserved i1 as mostly-nalufaT stalE>. I undersIand \halll\ere is a request for a variance before you at 1457 Edgewood. I l1ave recently ,"sired \he site and observed the condition 01 \he stream bank. The Coafition ~ you to deny Ihe request for a valiance to build a gue~ house 10< the JoIIowing reasons: • The siting 0I1he guest house will JlKely damage !he redwood and bay trees allhe back 01 \he property_ These trees are essenfl8llo< Iong-tenn bank stab<Tizalion and habital protection. • Though 1he bank is currently slabl1i2ed by sand bags, sand bags do noI las! i1deftnitely and could fal. Such fanure is often catastrop11ic and MIKe bank slab<1izafion pIOjec!s wiD require maximum se!bacl<s trom !he rrteral "lop-oI bank" 10 enable the waler disl1icllo use envirorvnenlaDy-soond methods- • The bank is very high and sleep and, therefore, ",,!nerable 10 cSestabtTrzation- • We believe that the Santa Clara Vaney Water District does not deftne IIood control se!backs as the rrterallop-Of-bank, b<A ralhef uses a fonnula which presarvElS Ihe angle of repose necessary lor envirorvnanlaDy-sourod IIood oonIrot A study 01 fie topology oIlhls streich 01 San FranciSQIJ~o CrE>ek would be n~'Y before a variance 0I11is nature could be granted without jenpardizing this we!-Ioved nallKal resource. We flank you lor consldemg our concems ancl as1< lIlat you dooy ..... ~_'"II'S req<lest for a'lar\ance 1>1 1457 Edgewood. "'.' Hon. Uzl<nis" Mayor City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Pal<> Alto, co. ~301 ." o Nov 30.9~ 5:18 P.03 Coyote Creek Riparian Sfation PO.8o&1021 41 Ahiso,C.lifomi .. YYJ02 • (4(J~1262"9204 December 1, 1994 RE: P.!o Allo General Plan Revl~· NAlural R1'8oUf«. E1o",enl llU! City 01 Palo Alto and Ille Coyole Creek Riparian Slatlon have many things In common; we bot].. share A concern for the health and future 01 Palo Alto', Mturol envirorunenl and _ .'" both on the brink of majo< end.avon. San Francis~uito ereel< fealUres promlnently In our &!wed effor1$. W. An' nearing cQI%\rletlon of. comprehensive habitat inventory of San I'rancisqulto Creek whi<h will be delJvered 10 the City in eMly 1995-. Th!s two year undertaking involved the <fforls 01 nCOTly 100 vol""le .... (citizens from Palo Allo, Menlo Parle and other surrounding communities) working for over 2.00 holm in iii< field and laboratory to p",vlde !he first volun!~"r-oricnlcd ri~ri.n habitat inventory in the State. In fact" this prcjt'ct (wlth fundIng from the u.s. En vironmenfal Protection Agency and the Sma Clara Volley Waler District) is being used ... model fo< wateTehed inventory Ind rnonitonnS progmM throughout California. A.. I direct outcome 01 the San Franciquilo C",d: Stream L.,ventory and <>!her cilizen-bascd efforts Oed by the I'rIends of s..n l'roncisquiro Creek) • w.tershed ptannins team was ....,mblcd and has bHn very effective in getting stakeholders together to solve problems 00 the Cn!OIc. Again. this eH"'t is being used •• model foe cooniinated resource manogement and planning programs in urban are ... One COOUX\()(l thread runs through an 01 Illese various programs and that is that the eff«ts which we and others hav~ begun 011 San Franc:isquIto Creek II1C part of • ground,wen of inlerest in preoerving and resloring riven; and streams, partkularly in urban areas. Also, many regional and .tate groups are looking to the communities sW'rounding Son Frand.quito C",.l< foe leadershlp in problem solving and resource prote<:tion. " ~'r • I r', t -. T " lEl NO.40S :b3-3523 General PI&n Comment. PAS" 2of3 o among these defidendes is !he erlI!linltiol\ of tM 100 fool ~!ba.:k requirement recommended by CPAC. Without provisions lOr se!backs and buffer ~"" ... , • creek'. ultImale!ale is IDOn! or leso 1Il'.1ed in con<n~, Here', why. When boJildil'lgs, roads, oc any improvod f""lily (and thls could be • paved trail) is placed too close 10 the edge of. river Ot s"".tTI, IOOneJ' or later, •• the /low of. river chang .. (which IlAlIIal rivers often do) thoH .lructurel will be threatened with destruction by Ihoge same noluTal foroes whlch keep otreams alive and fImctionJrIg, We have seen it happen over and over again .. .-.:I you would thInk by now we would have learned tha lesson. The Iloods 0/ 1993 ha.e forced entire Iowns 10 6nolly .<<opt the fact wt rivers wi!! always wID even when w.think w. "_ve them ,,,moll.d, It i •• lmply a matter ol time. The Santa CIar. Yaney Water Dislrict coru:id.,.. W. flooding potential along Sal\ Frand"!'-'lt{) Creek thE n\Q&t pot""tiaUy dl\IDJ.glng in aU of Santa Qua Counly. the primary "",son f"" thls is that the volume d w.ter /lowing t'1.IO !he CTO<!1r. during /1ood ever,!. is substantial enough and the banks "" <rodible and the sfru<:!ure, so near the edse of the creelc that a major flOOd event would cau .. millioru 0( do!IOI"'l in damages. The on!y way 10 avert thls situotlol\ in the fulure is Joe """,muniti .. Iu n!Cvgniz. th.! they cannot lIave I Nlhlral, biolcgkany functioning riVrT without glvlng it suffkien! room f{) do w 1Ia1 it ~s naw.Fiy. Thi. ""l"ire. thaI dev1!loped .",as be bpt beck from the river 0< stream \0 pl'(>!ect not only the habitat that ottum COl\tAtna but also 10 protect hultWllif. and property. One 01. the otMr things that Ita. become apparent from d. t. collected d "'ins our il'Iventocy;s the impact of seemin&'y innocuous activltlc< whcn rcorlc or<' allowod to "",.'upy areas immecliarely adjacent 10 streams, Habitat degradation rut. occurred ;rom people plontingnol\Nltive plant. as vegetative screens or f« Uleir ... thetk vafue. Many 0/ these plmts have invaded the riparian cOl'T'idor, di'l'l"".-d In,. n.tiv~ vt8et21tion, and a •• re5\llto "ave lowe1ed the cal'""ny oflh< ""biro! \() IUppo.-t nolive wildlife species, Our data clearly show d<.'Crea~ nati .... w1ldlif. species dlveroIIy In areas impacted by I'IOl'INItive vegelation. In addition. our monitor. have di!!<"Ov."," illegal drains from swimming pool. Ind backyard. which cvry conlan'JnAnts directiy into streams. These indd<ma; Ita"" been reported. 10 the proper authoriti •• but the fact is that if people-, bacleyard. were not right up .gair.>l lor sometime. even into) .. ". stream channel, these activities [!Degol Ot not) would not occur. Clearly there are many thorny legal isS\let surrounding the requirement for 50 tbacko and buffer zones, but there is ample data which supports the conMction [or nexusl between issues of l'ubtk he.IUl and soJ,,!), as wen is Clean Water Act m.ndates For maintaining: the "ber.eficial uses" of public trust waterwilYs. In clo5ing. r think the City 0/ Palo Alto is in • posi!ion Ie .he w courage and leadership in the .re. of natura! resource protoction and .nha,am.,,!. The City of SM }os. sp~nt -----~---..,.------.,,- ': ... : . " , , :~s TEL @.40$ 163-3523 " General Plan COJIUIlenfo r.hU several yurs developing I set 0( des'gn guldennH for develof'ml'nlS adjacent t<> riparian _ A.nd ",hiIe It"")' stopped short of "''1uirma the Implementatlon of the .. ~ In an ordirI.trIo>-level document, they do provide I good procedoru for tetbacb and buffer zones, It la our hope thaI the loading !Q1e tl.e City of Palo Alto Iw played In t~g Its community's nahlrill resoun: .. wiH continue through its reinslo foment of setback requirements In ill Ceneral Plan. It 1& .lso 0Ul' hope thaI you and the rest of the Council will ....,!he dlta wlUch we wm preoenllo y<>u shortly, 10 help ~de yw into wund landuae decWons regarding one oE your moot precious nalurtl resour<:eS -San Frafld&qulto Creelo:, Plase let me Icnciw If 1 ca" be oEan)' further help to yoo In your efi'oo. 10 pt..n for the City'. rontinued ~de:ship In envlronmenratly re5poMlble government. .~ " . CREscrNT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION P.O. BOX #51885 PALO ALTO, CA. 94303-0730 February 9, 1995 The Board of the Cresce..,t Park Neighbomood FEf> 1'l '9-35 Association wishes to express its opinion about the issue _'" _ _ of granting ~ which enable houses to be bullt"fii'-""T.'O~","",~"~ excess of the fAR. limits. Approximately 1/3 of the letters and phone cans which we receive from residents of 0lJ( neighborhood concem the loss of privacy and obtrusiveness of "oversize" houses. A great deal of corTIfl"lO(ity discussion and staff planning led to the current floor area ratio. We question the "illisdom of ignoring these established standards especiany in the case of properties which would accommodate a huge house without a variance. We trust that you will weigh carefully the effect of approving such variances Thank you fOf your considera tion. Sincerely, ~-- President, CPNA " ". '"~ '-". ATI'ACHMENT 8 Letters in Support of Project ... -,- January ).I99S Member. of Cily Coun~ Cily of Pale> Alto 250 Hamilton Aven~ Palo Alto. CA 94301 Re: Bini! and .. en Nguyen Applicatioo No. 94-UP-40 14S1 Edgewood Drive To Whom It May Concera: N.wl'0t\.1./f4o"' __ ~ P.O. So .. 51e92 Poill:! "tw. CA '4303 iNs 4'5 328-fiCBS 406 4:>2-6088 Fa .. 41S 321-5.:'50 J( ~ eJ:: TVI'T\ JAN S ms 01l' JA'WI'I ~.'f/fI J am v.riting tJus Jetter to express my frustra60n fur my friends and future: neighbors.. the Nguyens. 0.. Oe<:.mber-I. ) 994, I attended t1:. bearing lOr Ill. Nguyens DC tn. Variance Permit lOr the cottage. There were I fe .... nejghbors present Based on what """:as diSC1Jssed ... my impressi'on was that ll,e pfans were an within City code. AJI of the objections were suffidentIy an.su.'ered. Tbe1etter from the Cily dated December I~, 1994, granted them the Varianc. Permit whb some conditions whklJ they were wiffi.og to comply_Then,. a letter of objection came from. the same person who bas objected before. Now .. anotner hear.ng, e..'lOtber rnont!-. 10 corrclude"the bearing. How man)' times can the same person m~e L~e same appeal? At wllat point can tbe Nguyens considered' themselves fleing nanas.s.ed? I have knOWJl Sinh I.n.d i.e-Q foe £OOce t.."an to year5-throu.gh bU~l1eiS. contacts ar.d the L"\it ~ur years. we llave became dose personal mends. My observations of Binh ar.d Tief1 are tflat they are wonderful parents to ~ir children, Io .. ing a."1d res.pe.ctfi.l1 to t'heii' parents.. good entrepreneur. kind and fair employers to Iheil empioyees" ar,d indeed the kind of people anyone would like to bave as frlends a...,d neighbors, Moving to Palo Alto lOr Ill.if children's educa'ioo has been paramounllOr Blnh and r"",. tbe"i ~.ve looked at properties difigently lOr two years. Wheo tlley K>und the bouse 00 Edgewood., everyOtie,. LlJcTudiog me .. was excited. They U'ere maki[1g plans for their future . .Any unnecessary delay in construction mutts their lives must be put on bold. I wanl to ie em~b,.".$i!: th:"lt tney wiD :nake exc~n~n! Clei3-~bors!Ild a ddirute be:-oe-flt 10 the community. .... ___ ~I._d ~ ..... , LoIf, __ • -.,., Oo<t>< ~ r_ ..,~&g.,r"'-""ll .~. (I Irfl'" fer ~ Prtx1I.ICt!i I ~ Reg.'Sle<-e.d. ;:I;epotes.e"t.a\~ ta. NYUf( Sr!<:urrlies Inc 1S fII'.e~ro rm~. 5Wlr 500 Sa';, Jose, U i!lllO ~ .. " .... v. '''''''~''''" 1.:_", , .... ,_ .,,," _ -"'Ii .... "'~'" ''''f>o;O""",,' ~~.c:"'po<..,''''., !!O ...... ,,~"""" .... S' Iit~ ,, __ , ... ,.,. 'I"" lOr Itlll1D Friday, December 31, 1994 Members of Cily Council C"lI} of Palo Alto Civic Center 25Q Hamilton Avenue PalD Alto, CA 94301 BINH&.TfEN NGUYEN 1457 Edgewood Drive Palo Alto. ~ 94J01 Subject: Ng\.'yen Residence 145J Edgewood Drive Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear SirlMadam: Cll\' Cl' PALO ~LTo.c, eny CLUj,S OfF~_ 95 JA.ll-& PH \2: 5S 1r!~J1rv",.. JAN S. 1995 my IUtJ:"~ ~ \Ve would h"ke to express our opinion ar.j concen foe our new borne project loc:.ated at 1451 Edgewood Drive. . . Since May, 1994,,,", architect, Mr. Tom Sloan ~'" studied all tlle requirements by tlle City of PalD Alto Bul1d"mg Department needed \0 design our new ~orne. We were followed an the procedures that outline by the City of Palo Alto. Before we submitted the plan to City for review" 'II/e have made ffJorts to introduce curselves \0 the nearby neighboc' and s!>ow them tlle plans. W. noti<:ed ",.t a few booses around our new borne an bad cottages. We received some positive com ments .. bill never bad any negatio.;es ag;tinst our plan. We had a very ~tive feeling for this l'ieighbo!hood~ we thought .. e had cboseD our future home in the best interests foe our children and' felt our family would receIve a 'IO~.rm wekome {rllm our new neig.bbors. November 18~ 199--~ we wcr-J: k> City HaU for a be:uing on the Use-Permit a.,d Variant Permit for the cottage. There -.'as two farrulies preserll and a letter. I. One family was concernerl that [he main house has two stories~ [he master bedroom windows :having a clear vie .... of t1-.eir sv.-imming pooL With (riend'ly response we said we would planl reO .... ood trees for their and our privacy_ Tbey seemed satisrled Vrr'lth the solution and indicat(d lhat they b2S 110 probiem with Ute: conage. ; Member! ol City Couno@ De<:embor 31, \994 poge2 2. O!loe fanill) uked who WO\lld be living L" the cottage. We repned thac OUr pam!ts. ages 73 and 75 wOIJld be Jiving in it, and that is me Asian eroditiOll 10 tala: ""'" of the e\C!Uly. ~ also GOmmented that Ille) felt the main bouse """ 100 large. O!loe ol tile City Council member remlnded tllem t!>.aC L'Ie house iii under the t.llo~ by the City cocks. W. belie\le !hat this is an oo<mal good Iooldng bouse whi<:. is fits nicdy in the neighbodloo:l. 3. The letter from Mrs. lIonnk Miller Scel1\, laCed Nov.n,ber 17, requested more lime 10 review tile plan." Becaose the request from Mrs. lIonnk Miller Seein. the Ply r=~.edule anotller hearing on December I. 1994 at 3PM. Unfortunately. ~e were unable to attend tnt bearing due 10 an lI.~enl business L-ip. However ,our architect,. 'Tom Sloan; our general COi1st.~CIOf" BOO "jth Cor Construction; Keitl> Acl<erman; and Bassi Lee a friend from the Palo Alto nei~bborhooj. represented ~s at the !raeeOng. Mr. Tom Sloan and Ms. Bassie Lee will send in letters commenting about Ll-Jis meeti..,g. On December 22-, 1994 we received a lener fmm me C~y of pajo Aho incflCating l1l.a[ it wiD grant us {he Use and Variance permits. with some conditions: [I\Q\'e the cottage 10 feet. awa.y from back yard by reduce the wee-car-gara,g:e to two-car-.garage. Vle were cnn..apP'Yabout the eonclltkml but willing 10 proct«l. All we want i> \0 mah everyone ~.ppy, 10 boild our home and move in, and 10 be friendly "'ill! our ""igbbors, which has always beeR part of our lifestyle. On December 26. 1994 the City Of Palo Alto issue Loe penni! for !he main hOO5e with an tile changes as they req~ed in Ille leiter dare December 22, znd .. "e pranned '" submIl !he c<>ttag. plan in !he next couple ol day.. • On December 28, 1994 we got tile """"' thac we will received a Ieuer fr{)m Ille same persoo Mrs. Bonnie Mmer Stein ",to objected aboulthe co~e. Again, \11. City scheduled. hearing for la..U&ry 24, 1995 and also il1dkaced that it may lake anoiller moolh af"'t January 24 10 """elude the hearing. It tooIc 115 two years 10 find this property. We were very exciced and "'ere greaQy impr""",d with tile neigllborhood. Specially, our childre. !hey were planning. lot for the) furure with this bouse. Eves. though the house is empty, we wouldn·t want tM: bndscape to be.;:ome an cyeSC"re fur \be neighbor's and. hired 1. gar1IC:ner to maIntain the y~.rd every weet_ We na.ve done everything we can think of 10 please our nel,ghbors. Vv"e .. ",,,ere trying 10 build a bouse will bring more value to the neighborhood and its residence. Atlhis moment, we feel bun. We believe we have beea ~eated badty and unfa"irly. \Ve wen: feeling that we did not ha .... e any right.., build a cottage for our parent even though Mrs. Slein !las 'her O\, .. ned conag<:. We could JKJt build a big 'house ,.,bile they have blg bouses rncmseJ ..... es, . " • ...... :-. - ~.~-: - Membu of Cit)' Council@ December ll, 1994 Pa&e3 During a pilon< conversation between Mrs, Stein and Tom Sloan De«:mw 29, 1994, Mrs. Stein acknowledged lila! she bas a guest cottage bul she preferred no more cottages in the neigbborilood; she also indicated !hal she did nOl b1ce the "Gise of con struction. h is obvious 1hat Mrs. Stein', intention is 10 prolong construction by continuoos appeals. \Ye have IosI 5 months of valuable lime in lhis matter and we urWnly de _ Icncw wben ,.. can starllo build our new b<!me. Every monlh of delay rost us tboosands of dollars and Us tied .s up our mentally and emotionally; wilh lhis situation bas affected our ability 10 run our business eff<clively. Our daughter Angella 14 year old and son Brian 13 year old wm depress. They 2.Sked 1J$ so many questions that we ourself d"1<! not know how 10 uptain, sucll as is tbere anything wrong 10 have cottage 10 taldnS care grand paren!>?; wby tlley have !hey owu coIta&e and we <:aJI nex:>; they bave time roc hearing and appeal but bow about. S, we spend more than two houn everyday back and forth from house 10 school?; we can nOl see any frieods after school, and JlWly more ... We came to America because of the dlstinct freedom and peace of tlle country. A:s1aw abicfmg citizens,. we have rigbt to ~ve a normal TIfe. This letter is 10 request tf1.at )lou~ ffie Mem~rs of Ihe City Cooncil .. lock past unreason.able objections and grant us permission to build the OOItage 1IIilhou! fur.ller deJa y. Your attention and as.si5tance in this matter are greatly apprecialed. --;z~ ~---------------------. --_. _. --.-~ --'-- Binh Nguyen co: Mrs. Usa Grote Zoning Administrator Tom Sloan A.I.A. Metro Design Group 25S N. Market Street 1255 San Jose, CA 95110 408-280-6650 Mrs. Bonnie Miller Stein 1449 Edgewood Drive Pale> Alto, CA 9430 I -. ' tHY Of PALO ALTO.CA my tlER!,'S effie<: 9S JMl-~ /J{ '3: 25 ~ olCily Council City ofhlo AlI<> CMcCent .. 2SOHa",ilt"" Avenue Palo AM. CA 943Q I Keith Ackerman 4271 N. First St. San.Jose CA 95B4 21anuaty. 1995 ['GWkf like Ie spealI: in: support oCBinlI aDd lICIt NOO'tIl"' Re'i" 'home ~je;:I :l'l 1457 Edgewood Dm~ it! the cit) afPaJo Alto. Mr. N~ M spcDl "''0 years .c:templing 10 f'...M proprn:" in ~-our cit)' lIt'heR: he: ,,"-.lets his fu:.mily 10 lIve. ~ ~_~ propt:r1)' k Wbes eo build I ~)orne ftK his flmilJ Tbt ckslga. aftbrs house meeB all oIb ~is otlhe Palo Abo Building 0rcpa:tmmL A. '\.oarianct 9-J..V-lS til!' ~ 31'PfO'\'ed for Otis projeo."1.. WItb thl!i approvDl adcfitionaI ~ DO ~ covered pee-. ~ seem poi .. aess. l urge U!t C~-C~ ID D'IQ\."e forwoud in this made'o. ~ delay is costI)' '10 Mr. N~-e.a. and it ~'ou1cfbe ccmside.r3te lOr the Nguye:1l cb.ildfCB to be: iD 1heir Del." flcme lOr (be swt gf 5C'ltoal in Sq(embet. Sunday, January I, 19s)S Members of City Cooncil City of Palo Alto CMcCenter 250 Hamilton A veIlUe Pa/o Alto, CA 94301 BRIAN NGUYEN 1457 Edgewood On-va Poro AlIo, CA 94301 &<bject Nguyen Residence 1457 Edgewood Drive Palo Mo, CA 94301 cc: Mrs. lJ~a Grole Zoning AdmifJisfrator Mrs. Bonnie Miner Stein 144~ Edgewood Drive Palo Mo, CA 94301 Dear Member'S of Palo Afto Cit:! CooflCl7: - ~--- ~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CiTY Of fMO AHO.C]. Clir ClUKS GfFlC, 9S JAII-6 PH 12> SS RECEJVl'''' JAN 5 _ 1995 my MUlAl"1't p",,< First I would like 10 introt:Juce myself. my name is fW.an Nguyen. f am thirfOOfl years old, and rm a seventh grade student at Jordan Mida7e School I am vet)' concerned about the house that my fat'lef; Binh Nguyen, is !Jying 10 buM and the cold reactions fro:n various neig/1t;<xs. Most neighbors 00 nc( reafly care of how or when my father will build the hoIJse. bul some ccmpIain about every singre detail that they could possibly complain aboot! The person that I am most CX>llC$med about is A--1rs. Boon~ Miner Stein. She complains that the hoIJse 100 big, and thai we shooldn 7 have a cottage in If''~ back. She lias a cottage in her backyard, and also has a big house, so why can' we?!!!!! J just cionf understand. " . ---.', . -----"---, . --::: .-;-. What I wOIJId reaDy like to do is go home right after schoof and do my homework in Palo Alto earfJer /han having 10 an /he way back to San Jose which wastes 45 minutes 01 my time, sometimes even an hotIr. My sister and I never get to go 10 our friends r.ovses 10 do homework because our mother woukJ ".ave to wall for us to fmish up and /hen go home. Keep in mind that doing our homework takes about a coop/e of hours 10 /he least Many of my sister and my friends never get to go 10 our /louse to do homeWOfk because /heir parents never have the time 10 drive /hem. It is reaDy liard for my mom to wake us up at 6:30 in /he morning, and taking us to school at 7:00. Doing that is just the half of it for her. she has 10 drop us off at school. then drive an /he wcry bacK to worlr, then leave WOfk early to pick us up. then drOP us home. then drive back to wori<. My mom gets tired a 10( and she can? stand it anymore, J reanyget worried about her sometimes. Getting down to the point, I just wish that you could do something about the compfainls. Regards. Brian Nguyen Friday, December 30,1994 Members of City Council City of Palo Aho Civic Center . 250 Hamilton Avenue P~ Aho,CA 94301 ANGELLA NGUYEN 1451 Edgewood Drive Palo Alto, CA 94301 Subject Ngllyeo Residence 1457 Edgewood Drive Palo AIIO, CA 9430 I <:c: Mrs. Usa Grote Zoning Administralor Ms. Bonnie Miller Stein 1449 Edgewood Drive Palo Alto, CA 9430 I Dear SirlMadam: . ' .- .",,:,,-' , ... ":'~., RECEP'"'' 'JMi i) 5 :397: -. In regards 10 our falber's letter, I am writing my ow "-My name is Angell. Nguyen. 1 am fourteen years old and a fresbman at Palo AI!o High &hool. I !lave wailed two years roc a house ill Palo Aho and al this rale, I am slm counting. My family and I are fnistraled al the negative reactions that some of our nelghbot-s are giving 10 a boose so mu<:h like !heirs. Each of their booses have two qualities that they don't seem to want our house 10 bave; size and a cottage in the back yard. I 000"1 Imow whal the city requirements are for any of the irems thar a house should provide but I do Imow thaI !he plans for the bouse do JI()( exceed any one of them. lit fact, we have made sure 10 go below !be allowance .s • precaution. ~: .---;. . . -':". ·" ,-. • I don't understand why some 0{ our neighbors (Mrs, Bonnie Miller Stein) wanl 10 minimize our house into a cardbcard box with • roo( We've made so many changes and have gooe out 0{ our way 10 satisfy their needs arod not ours; even Ihough we will be living in it M you might have read in my fatbet's Jetter, our feelings for !his bouse bave gone from ecstatK: 10 hurt The neighbors have made us Mas if they don't wanl us 10 belong in Palo Alto or 10 live there. And why not? M far as the bouse goes, !his is a solid case of irony_No matter what Ms. Bonnie Miller Stein says or dOes, she cannot prove a decent reason why we are not alJowed 10 have a bad, COllage or • large sized bouse. This is becau..<e she has those !wo things her:;elfl In the case 0{ city requirements, it is within reason for me 10 say thaI the house has no "flaws". I know that we need neighbor input but Mn. Bonnie MIller is not the nearest neighbor and by means 0{ private property. we WIll not be bo!hering her (e.g. when one of our neighbors didn't ,,'anI for us 10 be able 10 see her swi=ing pool). Wby cOUk!n't Ibe City Council just recognize that fact and permit us 10 build !his bouse? In ronc1u~ioo, what r am trying 10 point oul is thaI the neighbors thaI bave negative feelmgs about the house have no reason whatsoever 10 push cue home away. Regards, Angella Nguyen