Site & Arch - UP - 2001May 16, 2002
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio
5846 Marshwell Way
San Jose, CA 95130
Re:
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive - Site and Architectural Review Permit
Dear Applicant:
Please be advised that at its meeting of May 14, 2002, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. 3429 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction
of a new single-family residence on the above referenced property.
This action is effective in ten calendar days, unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk by 5
p.m. on Friday, May 24, 2002. California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, governs the
time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (408) 866-2140.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Willsey
Planner I
cc:
Gregg Munn (Project Architect)
90 Mission Drive, Suite 6
Pleasanton, CA 94566
Frank Mills, Building
Chris Veargason, Fire
Harold Housley, Public Works
70 North First Street, Campbell, California 95008-1436 . TEL 408.866.2140 . FAX 408.866.8381 . TDD 408.866.2790
RESOLUTION NO. 3429
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CAMPBELL GRANTING A SITE AND
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT (PLN2001-133) TO ALLOW
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMll.. Y RESIDENCE
ON PROPERTY OWNED BY ROY AND ADRIENNE DIVITTORIO
AT 1512 WALNUT DRIVE IN AN R-1-1O (SINGLE FAMll.. Y
RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT. APPLICATION OF ROY
AND ADRIENNE DIVITTORIO. FILE NO. PLN2001-133.
After notification and public hearing, as specified by law, and after presentation by the
Community Development Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed.
After due consideration of all evidence presented, the Planning Commission did find as follows
with respect to application PLN2001-133:
1. The proposed residential project is consistent with the R-1-1O (Single-Family Residential,
10,000 square foot minimum lot size) Zoning District, as required per the Zoning Ordinance
and the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan.
2. The density of the proposed project site is 2.6 units per gross acre, which is consistent with
the General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (less than 3.5 units per
gross acre.)
3. The proposed project is well designed and is architecturally compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.
4. The proposed project is surrounded by other residential uses to the north, south, and west and
a commercial use to the east.
5. The proposed project is consistent with the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan.
6. The project provides four parking spaces where two parking spaces are required.
7. The completed project would consist of a 5,305.6 square foot residence with a building
coverage of 31 % and a floor area ratio of 39%.
8. The project qualifies as a Categorically Exempt project per Section 15303, Class 3 (New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
Based on the foregoing findings of fact, the Planning Commission further finds and concludes
that:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Planning Commission ResolUtion No. 3429
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Site and Architectural Review Permit -New Single-Family Residence
Page 2
2. The proposed project, as conditioned, will aid in the harmonious development of the
immediate area.
3. No substantial evidence has been presented from which a reasonable argument could be
made that shows that the project, as currently presented and subject to the required
Conditions of Approval, will have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
4. There is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fees imposed upon the project and
the type of development project.
5. There is a reasonable relationship and a rough proportionality between the Conditions of
Approval and the impacts of the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves a Site and
Architectural Review Permit (PLN200 1-133
) to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on property owned by Roy and
Adrienne Divittorio at 1512 Walnut Drive, subject to the following conditions:
Where approval by the Director of Community Development, City Engineer, Public Works
Director, City Attorney or Fire Department is required, that review shall be for compliance with
all applicable conditions of approval, adopted policies and guidelines, ordinances, laws and
regulations and accepted engineering practices for the item under review. Additionally, the
applicant is hereby notified that he/she is required to comply with all applicable Codes or
Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California that pertain to this development
and are not herein specified.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Plannim:~ Division
1. Project Approval: Approval is granted for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2001-
133) allowing the construction of a new single-family residence on property located at 1512
Walnut Drive. The project shall substantially conform to the project exhibits listed below;
except as may be modified by the Conditions of Approval contained herein:
a.
Project plans prepared by Design Tech Associates and received by the Planning Division
on May 3, 2002, including a site plan, floor plans, and elevations.
Color/material board and colored elevation received by the Planning Division on
November 13, 2001.
b.
2. Approval Expiration: The Site and Architectural Review Permit approval shall be valid for a
period of one year from the date of final approval. Within this one-year period, a building
permit must be obtained and construction completed one year thereafter or the Site and
Architectural Review Permit shall be void.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3429
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Site and Architectural Review Permit -New Single-Family Residence
Page 3
3. Accessory Structures: The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the existing illegal
detached accessory structures. The detached structures shall meet all current requirements of
the Campbell Municipal Code, the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan, and the California
Building Code.
4. Landscaping: The applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the Planning Division, prior to
the issuance of building permits, which shows the required one (1) tree per 2,000 square feet
of net lot area of the subject property. Existing trees within the net lot area of the subject
property may be included in the total. All new trees shall be planted within the net lot area
and shall be planted prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
5. Tree Protection Plan: The applicant shall submit a tree protection plan to the Planning
Division for review and approval by the Community Development Director prior to the
issuance of building permits, to show how protected trees to be retained on site will be
protected during construction, in accordance with the City's Water Efficient Landscape
Guidelines (WELS).
6. Property Maintenance: The property is to be maintained free of any combustible trash,
debris, and weeds until the time that actual construction commences. Any vacant existing
structures shall be secured, by having windows boarded up and doors sealed shut, or be
demolished or removed from the property (Section 11.201 and 11.414, 1985 Ed. Uniform
Fire Code.)
7. Contractor Contact Information Posting: The project site shall be posted with the name and
contact number of the lead contractor in a location visible from the public street prior to the
issuance of building permits.
8. Construction Hours: Construction activities will be limited to the hours of 8:00 am to 5:00
p.m. weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Saturdays. Construction is prohibited on Sundays
and Holidays unless an exception is granted by the Building Official.
9. Parking and Driveways: All parking and driveway areas shall be developed in compliance
with the standards in Chapter 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code.
10. Fences: Any existing or proposed fencing shall comply with Section 21.59.090 of the
Campbell Municipal Code.
Buildim:~ Division
11. Permits Required: A building permit application shall be required for each proposed new
structure. The building permit shall include Electrical/PlumbinglMechanical fees when such
work is part of the permit.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3429
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Site and Architectural Review Permit -New Single-Family Residence
Page 4
12. Plan Preparation: This project requires plans prepared under the direction and oversight of a
California licensed Engineer or Architect. Plans submitted for building permits shall be "wet
stamped" and signed by the qualifying professional person.
13. Construction Plans: The Conditions of Approval shall be stated in full on the cover sheet of
construction plans submitted for building permit.
14. Size of Plans: The minimum size of construction plans submitted for building permits shall
be 24 inches by 36 inches.
15. Soils Report: Two copies of a current soils report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building
Official, containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations shall be
submitted with the building permit application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed
engineer specializing in soils mechanics.
16. Site Plan: Application for building permit shall include a competent site plan that identifies
property and proposed structures with dimensions and elevations as appropriate. Site plan
shall also include site drainage details.
17. Foundation Inspections: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land
surveyor shall be submitted to the project building inspector upon foundation inspection.
This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the soils
report and the building pad elevation and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations are
prepared according to approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and
certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items:
a. pad elevation
b. finish floor elevation (first floor)
c. foundation corner locations
18. Title 24 Energy Compliance: California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF-IR and MF-
1R shall be blue-lined on the construction plans. 8% X 11 calculations shall be submitted as
well.
19. Special Inspections: When a special inspection is required by D.B.c. Section 1701, the
architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to
the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permits, in accordance
with D.B.C Section 106.3.5. Please obtain City of Campbell, Special Inspection forms from
the Building Inspection Division Counter.
20. Pollution Prevention: The City of Campbell, standard Santa Clara Valley Non-point Source
Pollution Control Program specification sheet shall be part of plan submittal. The
specification sheet (size 24" X 36") is available at the Building Division service counter.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3429
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Site and Architectural Review Permit -New Single-Family Residence
Page 5
21. Approvals Required: The project requires the following agency approyal prior to issuance of
the building permit:
a.
b.
West Valley Sanitation District (378-2407)
Santa Clara County Fire Department (378-4010)
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Demolitions Only)
School District:
i. Campbell Union School District (378-3405)
ii. Campbell Union High School District (371-0960)
iii. Moreland School District (379-1370)
iv. Cambrian School District (377-2103)
c.
d.
Note: To Determine your district, contact the offices identified above. Obtain the
School District payment form from the City Building Division, after the Division has
approved the building permit application.
22. Accessory Buildings: All proposed accessory buildings shall be properly described and
detailed to allow for plan check and issuance of separate permits.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
23. Work in the Public Right-of-Way: Prior to doing any work in the Public Right-of-Way, the
applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit, provide plans, pay fees and deposits, post
security, and provide insurance.
24. Water Meter(s) and Sewer Cleanout(s): Existing and proposed Water Meter(s) and Sewer
Cleanout(s) shall be installed on private property behind the public right-of-way line.
25. Utilities: All new on-site Utilities shall be installed underground per Section 20.36.150 of
the Campbell Municipal Code for any new or remodeled buildings or additions. Applicant
shall comply with all plan submittals, permitting, and fee requirements of the serving utility
companIes.
26. Utility Installation Plan: Prior to issuance of building permits for the site, the applicant shall
submit a Utility Installation Coordination Plan and Schedule for approval by the City
Engineer for installation of and/or abandonment of all utilities. Streets which have been
resurfaced within the previous 5 years will require boring and jacking for all new utility
installations. Applicant shall also prepare pavement restoration plans for approval by the
City Engineer prior to any utility installation or abandonment.
27. Storm Drain Area Fee: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the site, the
applicant shall pay the required Storm Drain Area fee which is $624.00.
28. Site Plan: Upon submittal of a formal application, the developer shall provide a complete
Planning Commission Resoluuon No. 3429
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Site and Architectural Review Permit -New Single-Family Residence
Page 6
and accurate Site Plan in accordance with the Planning Division's checklist.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
29. Preliminary Review: Review of this development proposal is limited to acceptability of site
access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations and shall not be
construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model
codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive
from, the Building Division all applicable construction permits.
30. Required Fire Flow: The required fire flow for this project 1,750 gpm at 20 psi residual
pressure. The required fire flow is available from area water mains and fire hydrant(s),
which are located at the required spacing.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of May, 2002, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Commissioners:
Alderete, Doorley,
and Leonard
None
None
None
Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Jones
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
APPROVED:
Tom Francois, Chair
ATTEST:
Sharon Fierro, Secretary
CAMPBELL
ITEM NO.1
I'?#.~.~ì
~
ST AFF REPORT - PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
MA Y 14, 2002
PLN2001-133
Divittorio, R. & A.
Public Hearing to consider the application of Roy and Adrienne
Divittorio for consideration of a Site and Architectural Review Permit
(PLN2001-133) to allow the construction of a new single-family
residence on property owned by Roy and Adrienne Divittorio located at
1512 Walnut Drive in a R-1-10 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning
District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following action:
Adopt a Resolution, incorporating the attached findings, approving a Site and Architectural
Review Permit to allow the construction of a new single-family residence, subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
ENVIRONMENT AL DETERMINATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that this project is Categorically Exempt
under Section 15303, Class 3 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pertaining to
the construction of one new single-family residence.
PROJECT DATA
Catel!orv
Gross Lot Area:
Net Lot Area:
Density:
Proposed
16,500 square feet (.38 acres)
13,500 square feet (.31 acres)
2.6 units per gross acre
Allowed/ReQuired
N/A
10,000 square feet
Less than 3.5 units per gross acre
Proposed Residence:
First Floor:
Second Floor:
Basement:
Garage:
Covered Porch:
2,340.5 square feet
1,562.5 square feet
858.6 square feet
544 square feet
470 square feet
N/A
N/A
N/A
200 square feet minimum
N/A
Accessory Building A:
Accessory Building B:
195.5 square feet
640.6 square feet
200 square feet maximum
1,000 square feet maximum
Floor Area Ratio:
5,283 square feet (39%)
45% maximum (6,075 square feet)
Staff Report - Planning Cohlmission Meeting of May 14, 2002
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 2 of 4
Catee.orv
Building Coverage:
Proposed
4,191 square feet (31 %)
AllowedJReQuired
35% maximum (4,725 square feet)
Parking Provided:
4 spaces (2 covered, 2 uncovered)
2 spaces (1 covered, 1 uncovered)
Building Height:
27 feet, 7 inches
28 feet maximum
Setbacks:
Front Yard:
Rear Yard:
Side Yard (Left):
Side Yard (Right):
25 feet
51 feet
12 feet
16 feet
25 feet minimum
25 feet minimum
8 feet minimum
12 feet minimum
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Residential
Residential
Commercial
Residential
DISCUSSION
Applicant's proposal: The applicant is requesting approval of a Site and Architectural Review
Permit to allow the removal of the existing single-family residence and the construction of a new
single-family residence at 1512 Walnut Drive.
Background: The project site is currently developed with a one-story single-family residence that
was built in approximately 1947 under the County of Santa Clara's jurisdiction. There are two
existing detached structures in the rear of the property that were constructed without permits and
are proposed to be modified and legalized through the building permit process as part of this
project. The project site is located on the east side of Walnut Dri ve between West Parr A venue
and Chapman Drive.
The project was continued from the April 9, 2002 Planning Commission meeting to allow the
applicant time to revise the project plans to incorporate suggestions from the Planning
Commission, Planning Staff, and the neighborhood regarding the perceived mass of the second
floor and the compatibility of the proposed residence with the surrounding neighborhood. The
applicant has revised the plans to incorporate hipped roof forms, the removal of the vertical wall
plane over the left part of the residence and replacement with a dormer, and new porch pillars.
The revisions have reduced the perceived mass of the second floor and therebye made the
proposed home more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
ANAL YSIS
General Plan Designation: The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Low
Density Residential (less than 3.5 units per gross acre.) The density of the proposed project site
is 2.6 units per gross acre, which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation.
Staff Report - Planning Cowmission Meeting of May 14, 2002
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 3 of 4
The revised project complies with the following General Plan strategies:
Strategy LUT-5.2a - Promote new residential development and substantial
additions that are designed to maintain and support the existing character and
development pattern of the surrounding neighborhood, especially in historic
neighborhoods and neighborhoods with consistent design characteristics.
Strategy LUT - 7 .2n: Consistency With Plans - Ensure that new development
and substantial remodeling projects are consistent with Specific Plans, Area
Plans, City Standard Details, and adopted Streetscape Standards to create a
cohesive design.
San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan: The project site is located in the San Tomas
Neighborhood and is subject to the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan (ST ANP). Staff finds
that the proposal is consistent with the development standards and design guidelines of the
STANP.
Zoning Designation: The zoning designation for the project site is R-I-lO (Single-Family
Residential, 10,000 square foot minimum lot size.) The proposed project is consistent with this
zoning designation and meets the minimum setbacks, height, building coverage, floor area ratio,
and parking requirements of the R -1-10 Zoning District.
Site Layout and Architecture: The proposed site plan shows the removal of the existing single-
story residence and construction of a new two-story residence with a new 858.6 square foot
below-grade basement. The existing driveway along the southern property line is proposed to be
replaced with landscaping. An existing twenty-foot high concrete block wall is located along the
eastern property line and serves as a barrier between the adjacent commercial business and the
residential property.
The proposed two-story residence incorporates representative architectural features of homes in
the San Tomas Neighborhood including hipped and gabled roof forms, a two-car garage, high
definition composition shingle roofing, and horizontal siding. Additional elements include
divided window treatments, a wrap-around front porch and an arched garage door entry.
The proposed colors for the house consist of a light gray body color with white trim. A turquoise
color is proposed as an accent color for the shutters and gutters. The proposed roof material is a
dark colored composition shingle.
Street Improvements: The project site does not have standard street improvements (curb, gutter
or sidewalks) and none are required and/or allowed by the STANP on Walnut Drive.
Landscaping: Pursuant to the ST ANP, the applicant is required to provide a total of seven trees
on site, one tree per 2,000 square feet of net lot area, including existing trees on site. The
proposed site plan shows the retention of many of the existing trees on site and the location for
Staff Report - Planning Colllmission Meeting of May 14, 2002
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 4 of 4
eleven new trees as well as the replacement of the existing impervious driveway with
landscaping. No protected trees are proposed to be removed as part of this project.
Site and Architectural Review Committee: The Site and Architectural Review Committee
reviewed this application at its meeting of April 23, 2002. The Committee was supportive of the
revised project as presented. The applicant discussed the possibility of providing a dormer on
the left side of the residence to allow more light into the living room area and break up the large
roof. The applicant has revised the plans since the Committee reviewed the plans to include a
dormer, which is reflected on the attached elevations.
A TT A CHMENTS
1. Recommended Findings for Approval of File No. PLN 2001-133
2. Recommended Conditions of Approval of File No. PLN 2001-133
3. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from April 9, 2002
4. Exhibits
5. Location Map
Prepared by:
~w. Lm~
Stephanie Willsey, Planner I
~~~~
Approved by:
Attachment #1
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF FILE NO. PLN2001-133
SITE ADDRESS:
APPLICANT:
P.C. MEETING:
1512 Walnut Drive
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio
May 14, 2002
Findings for Approval of a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of a
new single-family residence at 1512 Walnut Drive.
The Planning Commission finds as follows with regard to File No. PLN 2001-133:
1. The proposed residential project is consistent with the R-1-10 (Single-Family Residential,
10,000 square foot minimum lot size) Zoning District, as required per the Zoning Ordinance
and the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan.
2. The density of the proposed project site is 2.6 units per gross acre, which is consistent with
the General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (less than 3.5 units per
gross acre.)
3. The proposed project is well designed and is architecturally compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.
4. The proposed project is surrounded by other residential uses to the north, south, and west and
a commercial use to the east.
5. The proposed project is consistent with the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan.
6. The project provides four parking spaces where two parking spaces are required.
7. The completed project would consist of a 5,305.6 square foot residence with a building
coverage of 31 % and a floor area ratio of 39%.
8. The project qualifies as a Categorically Exempt project per Section 15303, Class 3 (New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
Based on the foregoing findings of fact, the Planning Commission further finds and concludes
that:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
2. The proposed project, as conditioned, will aid in the harmonious development of the
immediate area.
3. No substantial evidence has been presented from which a reasonable argument could be
made that shows that the project, as currently presented and subject to the required
Conditions of Approval, will have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
Attachment #1
Page 2 of 2
4. There is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fees imposed upon the project and
the type of development project.
5. There is a reasonable relationship and a rough proportionality between the Conditions of
Approval and the impacts of the project.
Attachment #2
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FILE NO. PLN 2001-133
SITE ADDRESS:
APPLICANT:
P.c. MEETING:
1512 Walnut Drive
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio
May 14, 2002
The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this application, that he/she is required to meet the
following conditions in accordance with the ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of
California. Where approval by the Community Development Director, City Engineer, Public
Works Director, City Attorney, or Fire Department is required, that review shall be for
compliance with all applicable Conditions of Approval, adopted policies and guidelines,
ordinances, laws and regulations, and accepted engineering practices for the item under review.
Additionally, the applicant is hereby notified that he/she is required to comply with all applicable
Codes or Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California that pertain to this
development and are not herein specified:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Plannine Division
1. Project Approval: Approval is granted for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2001-
133) allowing the construction of a new single-family residence on property located at 1512
Walnut Drive. The project shall substantially conform to the project exhibits listed below;
except as may be modified by the Conditions of Approval contained herein:
a.
Project plans prepared by Design Tech Associates and received by the Planning Division
on May 3, 2002, including a site plan, floor plans, and elevations.
Color/material board and colored elevation received by the Planning Division on
November 13,2001.
b.
2. Approval Expiration: The Site and Architectural Review Permit approval shall be valid for a
period of one year from the date of final approval. Within this one-year period, a building
permit must be obtained and construction completed one year thereafter or the Site and
Architectural Review Permit shall be void.
3. Accessory Structures: The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the existing illegal
detached accessory structures. The detached structures shall meet all current requirements of
the Campbell Municipal Code, the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan, and the California
Building Code.
4. Landscaping: The applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the Planning Division, prior to
the issuance of building permits, which shows the required one (1) tree per 2,000 square feet
of net lot area of the subject property. Existing trees within the net lot area of the subject
property may be included in the total. All new trees shall be planted within the net lot area
and shall be planted prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Attachment #2
Page 2 of 4
5. Tree Protection Plan: The applicant shall submit a tree protection plan to the Planning
Division for review and approval by the Community Development Director prior to the
issuance of building permits, to show how protected trees to be retained on site will be
protected during construction, in accordance with the City's Water Efficient Landscape
Guidelines (WELS).
6. Property Maintenance: The property is to be maintained free of any combustible trash,
debris, and weeds until the time that actual construction commences. Any vacant existing
structures shall be secured, by having windows boarded up and doors sealed shut, or be
demolished or removed from the property (Section 11.201 and 11.414, 1985 Ed. Uniform
Fire Code.)
7. Contractor Contact Information Posting: The project site shall be posted with the name and
contact number of the lead contractor in a location visible from the public street prior to the
issuance of building permits.
8. Construction Hours: Construction activities will be limited to the hours of 8:00 am to 5:00
p.m. weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Saturdays. Construction is prohibited on Sundays
and Holidays unless an exception is granted by the Building Official.
9. Parking and Driveways: All parking and driveway areas shall be developed in compliance
with the standards in Chapter 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code.
10. Fences: Any existing or proposed fencing shall comply with Section 21.59.090 of the
Campbell Municipal Code.
Buildim~ Division
11. Permits Required: A building permit application shall be required for each proposed new
structure. The building permit shall include Electrical/PlumbinglMechanical fees when such
work is part of the permit.
12. Plan Preparation: This project requires plans prepared under the direction and oversight of a
California licensed Engineer or Architect. Plans submitted for building permits shall be "wet
stamped" and signed by the qualifying professional person.
13. Construction Plans: The Conditions of Approval shall be stated in full on the cover sheet of
construction plans submitted for building permit.
14. Size of Plans: The minimum size of construction plans submitted for building permits shall
be 24 inches by 36 inches.
15. Soils Report: Two copies of a current soils report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building
Official, containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations shall be
submitted with the building permit application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed
engineer specializing in soils mechanics.
Attachment #2
Page 3 of 4
16. Site Plan: Application for building permit shall include a competent site plan that identifies
property and proposed structures with dimensions and elevations as appropriate. Site plan
shall also include site drainage details.
17. Foundation Inspections: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land
surveyor shall be submitted to the project building inspector upon foundation inspection.
This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the soils
report and the building pad elevation and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations are
prepared according to approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and
certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items:
a. pad elevation
b. finish floor elevation (first floor)
c. foundation corner locations
18. Title 24 Energy Compliance: California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF-IR and MF-
lR shall be blue-lined on the construction plans. 8% X 11 calculations shall be submitted as
well.
19. Special Inspections: When a special inspection is required by UB.C. Section 1701, the
architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to
the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permits, in accordance
with UB.C Section 106.3.5. Please obtain City of Campbell, Special Inspection forms from
the Building Inspection Division Counter.
20. Pollution Prevention: The City of Campbell, standard Santa Clara Valley Non-point Source
Pollution Control Program specification sheet shall be part of plan submittal. The
specification sheet (size 24" X 36") is available at the Building Division service counter.
21. Approvals Required: The project requires the following agency approval prior to issuance of
the building permit:
a.
b.
West Valley Sanitation District (378-2407)
Santa Clara County Fire Department (378-4010)
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Demolitions Only)
School District:
i. Campbell Union School District (378-3405)
ii. Campbell Union High School District (371-0960)
iii. Moreland School District (379-1370)
iv. Cambrian School District (377-2103)
c.
d.
Note: To Determine your district, contact the offices identified above. Obtain the
School District payment form from the City Building Division, after the Division has
approved the building permit application.
22. Accessory Buildings: All proposed accessory buildings shall be properly described and
detailed to allow for plan check and issuance of separate permits.
Attachment #2
Page 4 of 4
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMET
23. Work in the Public Right-of-Way: Prior to doing any work in the Public Right-of-Way, the
applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit, provide plans, pay fees and deposits, post
security, and provide insurance.
24. Water Meter(s) and Sewer Cleanout(s): Existing and proposed Water Meter(s) and Sewer
Cleanout(s) shall be installed on private property behind the public right-of-way line.
25. Utilities: All new on-site Utilities shall be installed underground per Section 20.36.150 of
the Campbell Municipal Code for any new or remodeled buildings or additions. Applicant
shall comply with all plan submittals, permitting, and fee requirements of the serving utility
companIes.
26. Utility Installation Plan: Prior to issuance of building permits for the site, the applicant shall
submit a Utility Installation Coordination Plan and Schedule for approval by the City
Engineer for installation of and/or abandonment of all utilities. Streets which have been
resurfaced within the previous 5 years will require boring and jacking for all new utility
installations. Applicant shall also prepare pavement restoration plans for approval by the
City Engineer prior to any utility installation or abandonment.
27. Storm Drain Area Fee: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the site, the
applicant shall pay the required Storm Drain Area fee which is $624.00.
28. Site Plan: Upon submittal of a formal application, the developer shall provide a complete
and accurate Site Plan in accordance with the Planning Division's checklist.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
29. Preliminary Review: Review of this development proposal is limited to acceptability of site
access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations and shall not be
construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model
codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive
from, the Building Division all applicable construction permits.
30. Required Fire Flow: The required fire flow for this project 1,750 gpm at 20 psi residual
pressure. The required fire flow is available from area water mains and fire hydrant(s) which
are located at the required spacing.
April 20, 2002
1500 Walnut Drive
Campbell. CA 95008
RECEIVED
At'K 2 j 2002
C\TY Of CAMPBELL
PLANNING DEPT.
Planning Commission
City of Campbell
70 N. First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
Re: Proposed residential development at 1512 Walnut Drive
Commissioners:
I attended the Commission meeting on April 9, and feel compelled to communicate my feelings
about the above proposed development, as my property and home abuts the referenced property.
Weare looking forward to welcoming the applicant into the neighborhood, and are in hopes that
he and his family will be able to work with the planning staffto meet a goal, which the staff will
recommend, in achieving theirs and the neighborhood's objectives.
I agree with staff recommendations as to size and mass appearing to be greater than the San
Tomas Area Association' s Guidelines.
I further agree that although the applicant has met the letter of the law, I feel that he is stretching
the spirit and intent of the guidelines.
I moved to this area some 20 years ago because of the rural nature, not for the possibility of
increased home value. I prefer to live in this atmosphere, and the San Tomas area is one of the
last in which one can do so within the proximity of one's work place and necessary facilities. I
support the San Tomas Assn. Guidelines and feel that those who don't should look elsewhere to
establish a home, and not try to force change in this area.
In considering this matter, any attention to my tèelings will be appreciated.
copy to: Commission members Tom Francois - Joseph D. Hernandez - Bob Alderete - George
Doorley - Elizabeth Gibbons - Brad Jones - Felicia Leonard: Senior planner GeoffI. Bradley
April 16,2002
Re:
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive - New Single Family Residence
Dear Applicant:
Please be advised that the above-referenced application has been scheduled for the following
meeting:
Site and Architectural Review Committee Meeting
Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2002
Time: 7:05 p.m.
Location: Doetsch Conference Room, City Hall, 70 N. First Street, Campbell
Planning Commission Meeting
Date: Tuesday, May 14,2002
Time: 7:30 p.m.
Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 70 N. First Street, Campbell
Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at (408) 866-
2140.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Willsey
Planner I
cc:
Roy & Adrienne Divittorio (Applicants/Property Owners)
5846 Marshwell Way
San Jose, CA 95130
Greg Munn (Project Architect)
90 Mission Drive, Suite 6
Pleasanton, CA 94566
:-0 :\mth First Street
CJl11poel1. CJlitornia 9"008-1411.,
III 40fi Sob:! 1 40
IX 408 861) 8381
rlJlJ ..OS 866.::-90
Peter & Audrey Kiehtreiber
1509 Walnut Drive
Campbell, CA 95008
408-866-1411 phone
408-691-4194 cell
408-378-7798 fax
4/9/02
To: City of Campbell Planning Commission
Chair: Tom Francois
Vice Chair: Joseph D. Hernandez
Commissioners: Bob Alderete, George Doorley, Elizabeth Gibbons, Brad Jones,
Felicia Leonard
Subiect: 1512 Walnut Drive. Site and Architectural Review. File No. PLN2001-133
We are Perry and Audrey Kiehtreiber, residing at 1509 Walnut Drive, directly
across the street from 1512 Walnut Drive. We have lived in our home for 3 years.
Most of the homes on Walnut Drive can best be described as modest to medium
sized ranch style residences. Our neighborhood is one of the few areas left in
Campbell that has a rural feel, with larger lot sizes, no sidewalks and old growth
trees. There are very few two-story homes, and those that do have a second story
are generally only partially built up and therefore have a varied roof line with
several elevations.
Partial Second Story:
The proposed 1512 Walnut Drive home is nicely designed and overall should fit in
well with the general tone of the neighborhood. That being said, due to the sheer
size of the structure it does present a large and to our view overwhelming presence
when compared to other houses on the street, even other newly developed or
remodeled homes. In order to reduce the looming aspect of the home, we would
like to propose that the builder consider making the home a partial second story by
bringing the roof line for the two ground floor rooms with cathedral ceilings down
to reflect the actual single story of that part of the house (labeled Living Room and
Family Room on the plan). Perhaps an 11 foot ceiling rather than a 20' ceiling
would still provide a spacious feel to that area of the home, and would bring the
outside roof line down enough to break up the massive front view of the structure.
Front Porch:
The front porch has large 12" rounded pillar supports. The rest of the neighborhood
has simple 4x4 post construction posts, and the rounded columns look a bit out of
place. We propose that they be toned down to a 6x6 square post, perhaps with the
stepped detail at the top, to make it fit in better with the rest of the porches in the
area.
Page 2
4/9/02
Subject: 1512 Walnut Drive. Site and Architectural Review. File No. PLN2001-133
Storage Units in Rear:
Storage Unit A - There are two proposed storage units in the rear. We are
requesting that Storage Unit A be moved in order to bring it into compliance with
the side setback requirements of the San Tomas Neighborhood Plan. Storage Unit
A was an addition which the homeowner built onto an existing garage
approximately 2 years ago and we do not believe it is eligible for any "grandfather"
clause providing it with an exception to the side setback rules.
Storage B - Currently the structure labeled Storage B is a residential unit which is
rented out to tenants. We would just like to know if this will remain a rental unit, or
if it will be just storage.
The City of Campbell just recently celebrated it's 50th birthday. Part of that was a
celebration of the spirit of the founders who wanted to retain a city with a rural feel
and an old fashioned sense of community. That spirit still exists on Walnut Drive,
whose residents welcome new neighbors and still care deeply about the
development of our community. Current development sets the precedents for future
buildings. We would like to make sure that new homes show respect for the present
community and it's values, as well as providing for the changing needs of the new
home owners and the reality of life in our high tech valley.
Thank you for your time.
Peter and Audrey Kiehtreiber
Peter & Audrey Kiehtreiber
1509 Walnut Drive
Campbell, CA 95008
408-866-1411 phone
408-691-4194 cell
408-378-7798 fax
4/9/02
To: City of Campbell Planning Commission
Chair: Tom Francois
Vice Chair: Joseph D. Hernandez
Commissioners: Bob Alderete, George Doorley, Elizabeth Gibbons, Brad Jones, Felicia Leonard
Subject: 1512 Walnut Drive, Site and Architectural Review, File No. PLN2001-133
Date: April9, 2002
My name is Peter Kiehtreiber. I live with my wife, Audrey, at 1509 Walnut Drive, straight across
from the proposed house. We have looked at the submitted plans and would like the opportunity to
comment.
This house itself seems reasonably designed; we do not have a fundamental problem with it. It is
however significantly larger in all aspects than all of the houses that will surround it: both those at
1500 and 1540, and ours at 1509. As such, to avoid a jarring mismatch, the house needs to
minimize its visual impact.
From the plans, we conclude that there is a partial second story, which fits reasonably well with
the street's neighborhood. However, the left side of the house consists of open-to-above high
ceiling rooms, which leads to an over-all appearance of a full second story, a jarring mismatch to its
surroundings. We believe that the roofline towards the left (as seen from the street) can be lowered
to reduce the visual impact without impairing usable space for the owner, and that doing so would
improve the architectural fit.
Another concern is the detailing on the entryway and porch. Houses on Walnut Drive tend to be
simple and understated; even new construction and additions try not to draw undue attention to
themselves. The proposed entryway, as indicated in the currently submitted plans, seems out of
place with the neighborhood. It seems to us that reducing the diameter of the columns and making
them simpler (e.g. square) would help the house fit into its surroundings.
Beyond the architectural impact, we as neighbors are concerned with noise impact, not of
construction but of the finished house and its use. We understand that Mr. Divittorio currently uses
a storage shed recently constructed in the back (labeled "Storage Unit A" in the plans) to store
supplies for his construction business, and uses a truck several times each week to pick up and drop
off supplies. Since the owner wishes to retain this storage unit, we are concerned that he will
continue this practice and in fact intensify it to the point where it might become a nuisance.
As you can see, none of our concerns are fundamental. We do need to register them at this time,
since the city's letter informs us that we must raise concerns now or lose any right to do so later.
We would be happy to work with Mr. and Mrs. Divittorio and the city to find satisfactory solutions
without unduly burdening their enjoyment of their property, and are looking forward to welcome
them finally into the neighborhood.
Respectfully,
Peter & Audrey Kiehtreiber
Planning Commission Minu.~s of April 9, 2002
Attachment #3
Chair Francois advised that this action is final in 10 calendar days unless appealed in writing to
the City Clerk.
***
Chair Francois read Agenda Item No.3 into the record.
3.
PLN2001.133
Divittorio, R.
Public Hearing to consider the application of Roy and Adrienne
Divittorio for consideration of a Site and Architectural Review
Permit (pLN2001-133) to allow the construction of a new single-
family residence on property owned by Roy and Adrienne Divittorio
located at 1512 Walnut Drive in an R-l-lO (Single Family
Residential) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt.
Planning Commission action final in 10 calendar days, unless
appealed in writing to the City Clerk. Project Planner: Stephanie
Willsey, Planner I
Ms. Stephanie Willsey, Planner I, presented the staff report as follows:
. Informed that the applicant is seeking a Site and Architectural Review Permit to construct a
new single-family residence on the east side of Walnut Drive, between W. Parr and
Chapman A venue. The existing single-family residence is to be demolished.
. Advised that the proposed 2.6 units per gross acre density is consistent. The zoning is R-l-
10. The project is located in the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan area.
. Described the proposed residence as being a two-story home, painted light gray with a dark
gray composition shingle roof. The project meets setbacks, FAR and height requirements.
However, staff does not find that this design meets the design guidelines of the San Tomas
Area Neighborhood Plan in terms of scale and mass.
. Recommended denial.
Commissioner Hernandez asked Planner Stephanie Willsey how long staff has been working
with this applicant.
Planner Stephanie Willsey replied approximately one year.
Commissioner Hernandez asked whether the issues of scale and mass were raised early.
Planner Stephanie Willsey replied yes.
Commissioner Hernandez asked if there have been attempts between staff and the applicant to
work these issues out.
Planner Stephanie Willsey replied yes.
Commissioner Hernandez presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as
follows:
. Advised that SARC reviewed the project at its meeting of March 26th and recommended
approval with the reduction of massing and additional meetings with neighbors.
Planning Commission MinUtes of April 9, 2002
Chair Francois opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.3.
Ms. Audrey Kiehtreiber, 1509 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Advised that she and her husband have resided across the street from 1512 Walnut Drive
for the last three years.
. Stated that the homes in this neighborhood could best be described as modest to medium
sized ranch style homes.
. Added that this neighborhood retains a rural feel with large lots and mature trees with few
two-story homes.
. Declared that this proposed residence represents a large, overwhelming presence in this
neighborhood, although it is nicely designed.
. Proposed a partial second story by bringing the roofline for the two ground floor rooms
with cathedral ceilings down to reflect the actual single-story of that part of the house.
. Suggested 11 foot ceiling heights instead of 20 foot.
. Said that the porch's rounded columns should be toned down.
. Asked that the two storage units be brought into compliance. Stated that Storage Unit A
should be removed and questioned the legality of Storage Shed Unit B, which is currently
being rented out to tenants as a residential unit. Asked if that unit would remain a rental or
be turned into storage.
. Said that new development sets precedents for future buildings and that new homes should
show respect for the present community.
. Distributed some photographs of a newer home at Walnut and Chapman as a more
compatible example of a new larger home.
. Thanked the Commission for the opportunity to address them.
Ms. Analise Wrightson, 1570 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Said that this proposed home is beautiful but out of place for this neighborhood.
. Said that she was concerned about the storage structures on the property and said that one
(Unit A) was built as recently as two years ago and therefore should not be grandfathered.
. Asked if the unit currently being rented would continue as a rental.
Mr. Michael Klupfell, 1450 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Expressed confusion over the fact that the staff report contains findings of support and
denial.
. Said that he is all for development but it needs to be curtailed a little bit.
Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Klupfell if he could be more specific about his concerns.
Mr. Michael Klupfell said not really. He added that this is a beautiful house for the right area
but would need to be toned down for this neighborhood.
Mr. Peter Kiehtreiber, 1509 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Said that he and his wife, Audrey, reside across the street from this site.
. Said that they had received copies of the proposal and looked at the plans carefully.
. Agreed that this is a beautifully drawn house but that it is big for this location.
Planning Commission Mim..~s of April 9, 2002
. Said that it is important to consider useful space versus how big it looks to the outside.
This structure is unnecessarily big in its appearance.
. Recommended that the high single story space be brought down.
. Expressed concerns about the accessory buildings in the back and questioned the legal
status of the living unit.
. Questioned whether the unit that is currently rented out would become storage in the future
or remain a rental living unit.
. Pointed out that he has observed lots of loading and unloading of building material from
Shed A by the applicant as a part of his construction business.
Mr. Steve Ciari, 1549 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Stated that he resides across the street and does not care about the inside of this new house.
. Declared that this new home will enhance his neighborhood and has the added benefit of
blocking an existing concrete block wall for a commercial property behind this property
that is currently visible from his home.
. Said that he likes the proposed colors for the new home, finds the home to be consistent
with the General Plan, has appropriate size and mass and will become a good single-family
home for a very large family that includes four children. He added that this is a stunning
home for which lots of time and effort has gone into the design. This will be a beautiful
home. Added that it is not too tall as no portion is higher than 28 feet. The porch columns
are okay as proposed.
. Stated that he likes the cohesiveness and individuality of Campbell.
. Said that people should not be opposed to change.
. Added that he will be proud to have this house on his block and looks forward to looking at
it as he arrives and departs from his own home.
. Said that the Divittorio's are willing to clean up this site with their project.
. Added that the neighborhood is due for a metamorphosis and he is eager to see this house
on his block.
Mr. Roy Divittorio, Applicant and Owner, 1512 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Said that he had been asked by staff to redesign the second story of his home.
. Pointed out that he does not have 20-foot ceilings anywhere within this home. The living
room has 14-foot ceilings.
. Said that staff had suggested the use of dormers, however, this would require a steeper
pitch to the roof (9 and 12) and creates cubby like spaces that they do not want.
Additionally, staff had suggested adding more first floor space and reducing the size of the
second story.
. Added that since they have four children they do not want to use more of the land but
rather want to have more open space available for their family to enjoy.
. Said that they don't want to adjust their windows as they would lose living space.
. Said that once he participated in a meeting on another pending project on Walnut, he
decided not to make any changes to his design as he felt it was superior to what is being
proposed on the other property.
. Said that this neighborhood is getting better.
. Advised that he has spent a good $12,000 on this project already.
Planning Commission Mim.._~s of April 9, 2002
. Assured that currently rented unit will not be a rental unit in the future but rather would be
used for storage. The other storage building will be reduced to 200 square feet.
. Pointed out that this is not a "spec" house but rather is being designed by he and his wife to
have a floor plan that flows the way they would like as they want to live here for the rest of
their lives.
. Added that a professional architect drew the home.
Commissioner Doorley asked how the Unit B became a rental unit.
Mr. Roy Divittorio replied that this unit was a rental when they moved in.
Commissioner Doorley asked what would preclude this unit from being rented out in the
future.
Mr. Roy Divittorio said that it had been recommended to him to have this unit legalized but
that he does not have the required 25-foot setback to do so even though the property is large
enough to allow a secondary living unit.
Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied that the City will take steps to have the kitchen and
bath fixtures removed from this accessory structure no matter what the outcome of tonight's
hearing.
Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Divittorio what compromises he has made over the last year
on his home design.
Mr. Roy Divittorio:
. Replied that his project was actually supported by staff but that staff changed their
recommendation after the problems arose with this other Walnut project. After that staff
instructed him to scale his project down.
. Said that his project meets all regulations. While they could make a larger first floor with
a smaller second floor, they don't want to do so. Anyway this house would still be big in
comparison with those in the neighborhood.
Mr. Peter Kiehtreiber, 1509 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Said that the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan includes its own building standards that
include subjective rules to "fit into the neighborhood."
. Reminded that local residents lobbied to adopt this San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan
because they wanted it.
Ms. Audrey Kiehtreiber, 1509 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Suggested that staff introduce applicants to the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Association
early in the applicant process to facilitate the scheduling of neighborhood meetings.
. Asked that the storage on site be limited to residential storage rather than commercial
storage.
Commissioner Leonard asked if the accessory structure meets setbacks.
Planning Commission Mil. .,s of April 9, 2002
Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley replied that the rear structure meets setbacks for use as a
storage unit but not as a living unit. The other structure does not meet setbacks. A Condition
of Approval will require legalizing these units. He added that a Home Occupation does not
allow on-site storage but only office use.
Commissioner Gibbons asked if the existing driveways would be removed.
Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley said that all but the one leading to the garage would be
removed.
Commissioner Doorley said that although the numerical standards have been met the specific
guidelines of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan have not all been satisfied. Said that
there has been no "give" by the applicant, which he finds troubling.
Commissioner Jones:
. Stated his support for this applicant.
. Declared that this is a good structure that meets the requirements of the San Tomas Area
Neighborhood Plan, requirements that are stricter than anywhere else in the City.
. Said that this represents an individual's property rights versus neighbors' rights.
. Said that the project meets the criteria established.
. Added that he does not want to have to get his neighbors' input on things he does to his
own home.
. Stated that this project will raise property values in the area.
. Said that he supports the applicant's position and not staff's.
Commissioner Doorley said that if the guidelines of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan
are not taken into consideration, the City should not have it.
Ms. Meg Stein, 1203 Hazel Avenue, Campbell:
. Said that she is the liaison between the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Association and the
Planning Commission, a position formerly handled by Gary Gairaud.
. Said that she had been involved in the ST ANA for about three years.
. Said that the spirit of the neighborhood is to keep the area rural.
. Stated that the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan needs to stand.
. Agreed that this is a gorgeous house but it lacks continuity with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Alderete pointed out the drawings within the San Tomas Area Neighborhood
Plan that depict "desirable" versus "not desirable" facades and asked Ms. Stein if she has seen
these drawings.
Ms. Meg Stein replied yes. She added that no one is interested -in seeing a repeat of the
"Castles" project at the corner of Hacienda and San Tomas Aquino Road.
Commissioner Alderete asked Ms. Stein if in her opinion this proposed home looks more like
the drawing labeled "desirable" or "not desirable."
Ms. Meg Stein replied desirable.
Planning Commission Mim¡.~s of April 9, 2002
Commissioner Alderete:
. Questioned why the accessory buildings are even being discussed.
. Said that the numeric guidelines of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan are met with
this proposal.
. Said that this project cannot be compared with the other three-house project on Walnut, as
it is different rather than the same.
. Stated that with the exception of the garage and round columns, this applicant's plan looks
more like the desirable than not desirable design per the ST ANP illustrations.
Commissioner Leonard replied that the accessory structure is an issue because it is illegal.
Senior Planner Geoff 1. Bradley added that the two accessory structures will be brought into
compliance regardless of what occurs tonight.
Commissioner Doorley said that Commissioner Alderete has made a good point regarding the
desirable versus not desirable drawings within the STANP. However, he added that these
drawings do not take into account their relationship to other buildings.
Commissioner Hernandez:
. Suggested that the ST ANP has to be considered as a whole, including text. The ST ANP has
the requirement for design guidelines and not just numeric guidelines.
. Said that he does not want to penalize this applicant.
. Stated that this is a good design.
. Said that it is important to consider the ST ANP to be a benefit to assure quality rather than
as a hindrance.
. Agreed that there is nothing wrong with a big house but it must meet mass and scale of the
neighborhood and that is where this project is deficient.
Commissioner Gibbons:
. Agreed that this project is different that the other Walnut project with three homes
proposed.
. Said that it is not simply the stats but also the intent of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood
Plan Guidelines that must be considered regarding scale and massing.
. Said that this is a complicated house and roofline.
. Suggested dormers or simplifying the design details to reduce appearance of massing.
. Said that this is a sophisticated house while the large house at Chapman and Walnut is also
large but simpler so it does not appear as massive. The amount of detail on this proposed
home helps make it appear massive.
. Stated that this project is close and could be made acceptable to the neighborhood with a
compromise to simplify it a little bit.
. Suggested sending the project back to staff.
. Said that she could support this project with some refinements.
Chair Francois:
. Pointed out that the applicant has put money and effort into this project.
Planning Commission MinuLes of April 9, 2002
.
Said that the Chapman house is not exactly compatible with its neighborhood although it is
beautiful.
Said that the rural neighborhood idea is almost obsolete as there are a number of huge
homes in the area.
Said that the project is compliant with the General Plan and San Tomas Area
Neighborhood Plan and that he would support it.
.
.
Commissioner Gibbons asked whether if this project is rejected, the applicant could come back
with a redesign without paying additional fees.
City Attorney William Seligmann replied that if the project is denied, the applicant could
appeal. To process a different design, the applicant would have to reapply and pay new fees.
Commissioner Hernandez suggested asking the applicant if he is willing to make some
changes.
Mr. Roy Divittorio said he was unsure what changes are sought and whether they would
actually make any difference.
Commissioner Hernandez asked Mr. Divittorio if he is open to exploring alternatives with
staff.
Mr. Roy Divittorio replied that he was open to some changes as long as they do not cost a
fortune to implement and makes the house look better.
Commissioner Jones told Mr. Divittorio that he is prepared to make a motion recommending
approval but that he was uncertain of the vote.
Commissioner Gibbons asked Mr. Divittorio if he would consider simplifying the detailing on
the porch.
Mr. Roy Divittorio replied yes.
Commissioner Leonard said that it is hard to support this project now since the perceived
massing is too large. Architectural improvements can be made to diminish the massing and a
compromise reached.
Mr. Roy Divittorio pointed out that the two-dimensional drawing does not accurately reflect
the fact that the elements of this home keep stepping back. He added that the second story is
only 54 percent of the first story. Expressed concerns at having to pay new fees if this
proposal is denied.
Chair Francois reminded that the denial could also be appealed to Council. However, he said
with some modifications, this project can be made to work.
Commissioner Gibbons proposed a continuance.
Planning Commission Mimnes of April 9, 2002
Mr. Gary Gairaud, 615 Louise Court, Campbell:
. Advised that he was watching this meeting from home and felt compelled to drive down to
speak to this project.
. Said that it is clear a continuance is needed here.
. Said he was willing to extend himself to help make a neighborhood meeting happen.
Ms Lisa Hereford, 1295 Walnut Drive, Campbell:
. Said that she feels sorry for this applicant.
. Said that she would be happy to have this house located across the street from her.
. Suggested that the Commission "cut him a break."
Chair Francois said that in the spirit of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan, the
Commission wants to make this project work for the applicant to create a beautiful home and a
wonderful environment for the applicant's family.
Commissioner Alderete said that this project comes so close to the guidelines that he does not
feel that it should be continued. Added that perhaps more specific guidelines are required.
Chair Francois agreed that this issue could be addressed in the future.
Senior Planner Geoff I. Bradley advised that the applicant is agreeable to a continuance.
SARC would review the revised plans on April 23rd and the Commission on May 14th.
Motion:
Upon motion of Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Doorley,
the Planning Commission continued consideration of an application for a
Site and Architectural Review Permit (pLN2001-133) to allow the
construction of a new single-family residence on property owned by Roy
and Adrienne Divittorio located at 1512 Walnut Drive, to the Planning
Commission meeting of May 14,202, by the following roll call vote:
A YES: Alderete, Doorley, Francois, Gibbons, Hernandez, Jones and
Leonard
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
***
Chair Francois read Agenda Item No.4 into the record.
CAMPBELL
ITEM NO.3
~
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
APRIL 9, 2002
PLN2001-133
Divittorio, R. & A.
Public Hearing to consider the application of Roy and Adrienne
Divittorio for consideration of a Site and Architectural Review Permit
(PLN2001-133) to allow the construction of a new single-family
residence on property owned by Roy and Adrienne Divittorio located at
1512 Walnut Drive in a R-l-lO (Single-Family Residential) Zoning
District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following action:
Adopt a Resolution, incorporating the attached findings, Denying a Site and Architectural
Review Permit to allow the construction of a new single-family residence.
ENVIRONMENT AL DETERMINATION
This project is categorically exempt under Section 15303, Class 3 (a) of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pertaining to the construction of one new single-family
residence; therefore, no environmental action is required.
PROJECT DATA
Cateeorv
Gross Lot Area:
Net Lot Area:
Density:
Proposed
16,500 square feet (.38 acres)
13,500 square feet (.31 acres)
2.6 units per gross acre
Allowed/ReQuired
N/A
10,000 square feet
Less than 3.5 units per gross acre
Proposed Residence:
First Floor:
Second Floor:
Basement:
Garage:
2,340.5 square feet
1,562.5 square feet
858.6 square feet
544 square feet
N/A
N/A
N/A
200 square feet minimum
Covered Porch:
470 square feet
N/A
Accessory Building A:
Accessory Building B:
195.5 square feet
640.6 square feet
200 square feet maximum
1,000 square feet maximum
Floor Area Ratio:
Building Coverage:
5,283 square feet (39%)
4,191 square feet (31%)
45% maximum (6,075 square feet)
35% maximum (4,725 square feet)
Parking Provided:
4 spaces (2 covered, 2 uncovered)
2 spaces (1 covered, 1 uncovered)
Staff Report - Planning Couhnission Meeting of April 9, 2002
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 2
Cate2orv
Building Height:
Proposed
27 feet, 7 inches
AllowedlReQuired
28 feet maximum
Setbacks:
Front Yard:
Rear Yard:
Side Yard (Left):
Side Yard (Right):
25 feet
51 feet
12 feet
16 feet
25 feet minimum
25 feet minimum
8 feet minimum
12 feet minimum
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Residential
Residential
Commercial
Residential
DISCUSSION
Applicant's proposal: The applicant is requesting approval of a Site and Architectural Review
Permit to allow the removal of the existing single-family residence and the construction of a new
single-family residence at 1512 Walnut Drive.
Background: The project site is currently developed with a one-story single-family residence that
was built in approximately 1947 under the County of Santa Clara's jurisdiction. There are two
existing detached structures in the rear of the property that were constructed without permits and
are proposed to be modified and legalized through the building permit process as part of this
project. The project site is located on the east side of Walnut Drive between West Parr Avenue
and Chapman Drive.
ANAL YSIS
General Plan Designation: The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Low
Density Residential (less than 3.5 units per gross acre.) The density of the proposed project site
is 2.6 units per gross acre, which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation.
The following General Plan Strategies were used in analyzing the proposed site and building
design:
Strategy LUT-5.2a - Promote new residential development and substantial additions that are
designed to maintain and support the existing character and development pattern of the
surrounding neighborhood, especially in historic neighborhoods and neighborhoods with
consistent design characteristics.
Staff finds that the scale and mass of the proposed residence does not maintain and support the
existing character and development pattern of the surrounding neighborhood.
Staff Report - Planning COlllmission Meeting of April 9, 2002
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 3
Strategy LUT-7.2n: Consistency With Plans - Ensure that new development and substantial
remodeling projects are consistent with Specific Plans, Area Plans, City Standard Details, and
adopted Streetscape Standards to create a cohesive design.
Staff finds that the proposed residence is inconsistent with the San Tomas Area Neighborhood
Plan design guidelines because the perceived scale and mass of the proposed residence is not
compatible with the adjacent homes and the surrounding neighborhood.
San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan: The project site is located within the San Tomas
Neighborhood and is subject to the development standards and design guidelines of the San
Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan (ST ANP). The proposed project meets the requirements for
setbacks, lot coverage, floor area ratio, and height. However, staff finds that the proposed
residence does not meet the design guidelines of the ST ANP. The ST ANP requires that the scale
and mass of new homes be compatible with the existing homes in the surrounding area. In a
predominately single-story residential neighborhood, this can be accomplished by using one and
half story designs with dormers or partial two-story designs.
Although the proposed residence incorporates many architectural features that are representative
of the San Tomas Neighborhood such as a porch that runs across the front of the house,
horizontal siding, and a two-car garage, staff finds that the perceived scale and mass of the
proposed residence is not compatible with the adjacent single-story homes and the surrounding
neighborhood.
The square footage of the second floor represents 54% of the square footage of the first floor
(including the garage). Although numerically the percentage of the second floor would represent
a "partial two-story," this percentage does not include the clear-story volume that is proposed
over the living room and family room area that is not counted in the second floor area
calculation. This empty space increases the perceived mass of the second floor without
providing any useable floor area. The perceived mass of the second floor could be reduced by:
. Minimizing the vertical wall planes on the second floor by placing the living area below the
roof with dormers;
. Placing additional floor area on the first floor; or
. Eliminating the clear-story volume on the second floor.
Staff is recommending denial of the Site and Architectural Review Permit for inconsistency with
the General Plan Strategies and the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan as discussed above.
Zoning Designation: The zoning designation for the project site is R-1-1O (Single-Family
Residential, 10,000 square foot minimum lot size.) The proposed project complies with the
development standards for the R -1-10 Zoning District and the ST ANP except for the design
guidelines of the STANP regarding perceived scale and massing and compatibility with the
surrounding neighborhood.
Building Design: The proposed two-story residence utilizes both hipped and gabled roof forms,
horizontal siding, and composition shingle roofing. Additional elements include divided window
Staff Report - Planning Columission Meeting of April 9, 2002
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 4
treatments, a wrap-around front porch, and an arched garage door entry.
The proposed colors for the house consist of a light gray body color with a white trim. A
turquoise color is proposed as an accent color for the shutters and gutters. The proposed roof
material is a dark colored composition shingle.
Street Improvements: The project site does not have standard street improvements (curb, gutter
or sidewalks) and none are required and/or allowed by the STANP on Walnut Drive.
Landscaping: Pursuant to the STANP, the applicant is required to provide a total of seven trees
on site, one tree per 2,000 square feet of net lot area, including existing trees on site. The
proposed site plan shows the retention of many of the existing trees on site and the location for
eleven new trees as well as the replacement of the existing impervious driveway with
landscaping. No protected trees are proposed to be removed as part of this project.
Site and Architectural Review Committee: The Site and Architectural Review Committee
reviewed this application at its meeting of March 26, 2002. The Committee recommended that
the applicant explore options to help reduce the massing of the second floor so that it would be
more compatible with the adjacent residences and surrounding neighborhood. The applicant has
not revised the plans since the Committee reviewed the plans.
A TT A CHMENTS
1. Findings for Denial of File No. PLN 2001-133
2. Findings for Approval of File No. PLN 2001-133
3. Conditions of Approval of File No. PLN 2001-133
4. Exhibits
5. Location Map
Approved by:
~pA11-<LLQ - W~
Stephanie Willsey, Planner I
-!l. ~~J~
Prepared by:
Attachment #1
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF FILE NO. PLN2001-133
SITE ADDRESS:
APPLICANT:
P.c. MEETING:
1512 Walnut Drive
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio
April 9, 2002
Findings for Denial of a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of a new
single-family residence at 1512 Walnut Drive.
The Planning Commission finds as follows with regard to File No. PLN 2001-133:
1. The proposed project is not consistent with the Strategies of the General Plan in that the
proposed residence does not maintain and support the existing character and development
pattern of the surrounding neighborhood and is inconsistent with the San Tomas Area
Neighborhood Plan.
2. The proposed project is not consistent with the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan in that
the perceived scale and mass of the proposed residence is not compatible with the adjacent
homes and the surrounding neighborhood.
3. The proposed project is surrounded by houses that are of a different scale and architectural
style.
4. The completed project would consist of a 5,305.6 square foot residence with a building
coverage of 31 % and a floor area ratio of 39%.
Based on the foregoing findings of fact, the Planning Commission further finds and concludes
that:
1. The proposed project is not consistent with the General Plan.
2. The proposed project is not consistent with the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan.
3. The proposed project will not aid in the harmonious development of the immediate area.
4. The proposed project is not compatible with the adjacent land uses and the surrounding
neighborhood.
Attachment #2
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF FILE NO. PLN2001-133
SITE ADDRESS:
APPLICANT:
P.C. MEETING:
1512 Walnut Drive
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio
April 9, 2002
Findings for Approval of a Site and Architectural Review Permit to allow the construction of a
new single-family residence at 1512 Walnut Drive.
The Planning Commission finds as follows with regard to File No. PLN 2001-133:
1. The proposed residential project is consistent with the R-1-1O (Single-Family Residential,
10,000 square foot minimum lot size) Zoning District, as required per the Zoning Ordinance
and the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan.
2. The density of the proposed project site is 2.6 units per gross acre, which is consistent with
the General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (less than 3.5 units per
gross acre.)
3. The proposed project is well designed and is architecturally compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.
4. The proposed project is consistent with the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan.
5. The completed project would consist of a 5,305.6 square foot residence with a building
coverage of 31 % and a floor area ratio of 39%.
6. The project is not located in a particularly sensitive environment; and no substantial evidence
has been presented to suggest that there is a reasonable possibility that significant
environmental impacts would result from the project due to unusual circumstances or from
the cumulative impacts of successive projects of the same type in the same place.
Based on the foregoing findings of fact, the Planning Commission further finds and concludes
that:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
2. The proposed project, as conditioned, will aid in the harmonious development of the
immediate area.
3. There is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fees imposed upon the project and
the type of development project.
4. There is a reasonable relationship and a rough proportionality between the Conditions of
Approval and the impacts of the project.
Attachment #3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FILE NO. PLN 2001-133
SITE ADDRESS:
APPLICANT:
P.C. MEETING:
1512 Walnut Drive
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio
April 9, 2002
The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this application, that he/she is required to meet the
following conditions in accordance with the ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of
California. Where approval by the Community Development Director, City Engineer, Public
Works Director, City Attorney, or Fire Department is required, that review shall be for
compliance with all applicable Conditions of Approval, adopted policies and guidelines,
ordinances, laws and regulations, and accepted engineering practices for the item under review.
Additionally, the applicant is hereby notified that he/she is required to comply with all applicable
Codes or Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California that pertain to this
development and are not herein specified:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Plannin2 Division
1. Project Approval: Approval is granted for a Site and Architectural Review Permit
(PLN2001-133) allowing the construction of a new single-family residence on property
located at 1512 Walnut Drive. The project shall substantially conform to the project exhibits
listed below; except as may be modified by the Conditions of Approval contained herein.
a.
Project plans prepared by Design Tech Associates and received by the Planning Division
on February 26, 2002, including a site plan, floor plans, and elevations.
Color/material board and colored elevation received by the Planning Division on
November 13, 2001.
b.
2. Approval Expiration: The Site and Architectural Review Permit approval shall be valid for a
period of one year from the date of final approval. Within this one-year period, a building
permit must be obtained and construction completed one year thereafter or the Site and
Architectural Review Permit shall be void.
3. Accessory Structures: The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the existing illegal
detached accessory structures. The detached structures shall meet all current requirements of
the Campbell Municipal Code, the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan, and the California
Building Code.
4. Landscaping: The applicant shall be required to provide a total of seven trees on site - one
tree per 2,000 square feet of net lot area. Existing trees within the net lot area of the subject
property may be included in the total. All new trees shall be planted within the net lot area
and shall be planted prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
5. Tree Protection Plan: The applicant shall submit a tree protection plan, in accordance with
the City's Water Efficient Landscape Standards (WELS) and the Tree Protection
Conditions of Approval - t .anning Commission Meeting of April Ý, LO02
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 2
Regulations, to indicate how the trees to be retained on site will be protected during
construction, prior to the issuance of building permits.
6. Property Maintenance: The property is to be maintained free of any combustible trash,
debris, and weeds until the time that actual construction commences. Any vacant existing
structures shall be secured, by having windows boarded up and doors sealed shut, or be
demolished or removed from the property (Section 11.201 and 11.414, 1985 Ed. Uniform
Fire Code.)
7. Parking and Driveways: All parking and driveway areas shall be developed in compliance
with the standards in Chapter 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code.
8. Fences: Any existing or proposed fencing shall comply with Section 21.59.090 of the
Campbell Municipal Code.
Buildine Division
9. Permits Required: A building permit application shall be required for each proposed new
structure. The building permit shall include Electrical/PlumbinglMechanical fees when such
work is part of the permit.
10. Plan Preparation: This project requires plans prepared under the direction and oversight of a
California licensed Engineer or Architect. Plans submitted for building permits shall be "wet
stamped" and signed by the qualifying professional person.
11. Construction Plans: The Conditions of Approval shall be stated in full on the cover sheet of
construction plans submitted for building permit.
12. Size of Plans: The minimum size of construction plans submitted for building permits shall
be 24 in. X 36 in.
13. Soils Report: Two copies of a current soils report, prepared to the satisfaction of the
Building Official, containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations shall be
submitted with the building permit application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed
engineer specializing in soils mechanics.
14. Site Plan: Application for building permit shall include a competent site plan that identifies
property and proposed structures with dimensions and elevations as appropriate. Site plan
shall also include site drainage details.
15. Foundation Inspections: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land
surveyor shall be submitted to the project building inspector upon foundation inspection.
This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the soils
report and the building pad elevation and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations are
prepared according to approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and
certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items:
Conditions of Approval - r I<mning Commission Meeting of April 9, LO02
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 3
a.
b.
pad elevation
finish floor elevation (first floor)
foundation corner locations
c.
16. Title 24 Energy Compliance: California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF-IR and MF-
lR shall be blue-lined on the construction plans. 8% X 11 calculations shall be submitted as
well.
17. Special Inspections: When a special inspection is required by UB.c. Section 1701, the
architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to
the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permits, in accordance
with UB.C Section 106.3.5. Please obtain City of Campbell, Special Inspection forms from
the Building Inspection Division Counter.
18. Pollution Prevention: The City of Campbell, standard Santa Clara Valley Non-point Source
Pollution Control Program specification sheet shall be part of plan submittal. The
specification sheet (size 24" X 36") is available at the Building Division service counter.
19. Approvals Required: The project requires the following agency approval prior to issuance of
the building permit:
a.
b.
c.
d.
West Valley Sanitation District (378-2407)
Santa Clara County Fire Department (378-4010)
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Demolitions Only)
School District:
i) Campbell Union School District (378-3405)
ii) Campbell Union High School District (371-0960)
iii) Moreland School District (379-1370)
iv) Cambrian School District (377-2103)
Note: To Determine your district, contact the offices identified above.
Obtain the School District payment form from the City Building Division,
after the Division has approved the building permit application.
20. Accessory Buildings: All proposed accessory buildings shall be properly described and
detailed to allow for plan check and issuance of separate permits.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMET
21. Work in the Public Right-of-Way: Prior to doing any work in the Public Right-of-Way, the
applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit, provide plans, pay fees and deposits, post
security, and provide insurance.
22. Water Meter(s) and Sewer Cleanout(s): Existing and proposed Water Meter(s) and Sewer
Conditions of Approval -1 .dnning Commission Meeting of April 9, LO02
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive
Page 4
Cleanout(s) shall be installed on private property behind the public right-of-way line.
23. Utilities: All new on-site Utilities shall be installed underground per Section 20.36.150 of
the Campbell Municipal Code for any new or remodeled buildings or additions. Applicant
shall comply with all plan submittals, permitting, and fee requirements of the serving utility
companIes.
24. Utility Installation Plan: Prior to issuance of building permits for the site, the applicant shall
submit a Utility Installation Coordination Plan and Schedule for approval by the City
Engineer for installation of and/or abandonment of all utilities. Streets which have been
resurfaced within the previous 5 years will require boring and jacking for all new utility
installations. Applicant shall also prepare pavement restoration plans for approval by the
City Engineer prior to any utility installation or abandonment.
25. Storm Drain Area Fee: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the site, the
applicant shall pay the required Storm Drain Area fee which is $624.00.
26. Site Plan: Upon submittal of a formal application, the developer shall provide a complete
and accurate Site Plan in accordance with the Planning Division's checklist.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
27. Preliminary Review: Review of this development proposal is limited to acceptability of site
access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations and shall not be
construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model
codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive
from, the Building Division all applicable construction permits.
28. Required Fire Flow: The required fire flow for this project 1,750 gpm at 20 psi residual
pressure. The required fire flow is available from area water mains and fire hydrant(s) which
are located at the required spacing.
o~ . CA>'11
. ,ó~
~' «'
- .-
u .-
.... ....
1- "
'" ~"-
'ORCH~RO'
CITY OF CAMPBELL
Community Development Department - Current Planning
March 29, 2002
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Campbell has set the time of
7:30 p.m., or shortly thereafter, on Tuesday, April 9, 2002, in the City Hall Council Chambers,
70 North First Street, Campbell, California, for a Public Hearing to consider the application of
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio for consideration of a Site and Architectural Review Permit
(PLN2001-133) to allow the construction of a new single-family residence on property owned by
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio located at 1512 Walnut Drive in an R-l-lO (Single Family
Residential) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt.
Interested persons may appear and be heard at this hearing. Please be advised that if you
challenge the nature of the above project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues
you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing described in this Notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City of Campbell Planning Commission at, or prior to, the
Public Hearing. Questions may be addressed to the Community Development Department at
(408) 866-2140.
Decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council. Appeals must be
submitted to the City Clerk in writing within 10 calendar days of an action by the Commission.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, listening assistive devices are available
for all meetings held in the Council Chambers. If you require accommodation, please contact the
Community Development Department at (408) 866-2140, at least one week in advance of the
meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF CAMPBELL
SHARON FIERRO
SECRETARY
PLEASE NOTE:
When calling about this Notice,
please refer to File No. PLN2001-133
Address: 1512 Walnut Drive
70 North First Street. Campbell, California 95008- 436
TEL 408.866.2140 . FAX 408.866.8381 . Tim 408.866.2790
March 20, 2002
Re:
PLN2001-133 - 1512 Walnut Drive -Site & Architectural Permit
Dear Applicant:
Please be advised that the above-referenced application has been scheduled for the following
meetings:
Site and Architectural Review Committee Meeting
Date: Tuesday, March 26, 2002
Time: 6:45 p.m.
Location: Planning Conference Room, City Hall, 70 N. First Street, Campbell
Planning Commission Meeting
Date: Tuesday, April 9, 2002
Time: 7:30 p.m.
Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 70 N. First Street, Campbell
Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at (408) 866-
2140.
Sincerely,
~Lu~
Stephanie Willsey
Planner I
cc:
Roy and Adrienne Divittorio (Applicants/Property Owner)
5846 Marshwell Way
San Jose, CA 95130
Greg Munn (Architect)
90 Mission Drive, Suite 6
Pleasanton, CA 94566
-I) '.;Of¡\' Flrq Srfeer
CUll plH: i I CJiitornliJ 9'iOOB-143()
ill -H)~ Sob:: i 40
c,\\ 403 S6ri S3B i
:DIJ -10<; StiÖ:::-90
December 5,2001
Mr. Greg Munn
Design Tech Associates
90 Mission Drive-STE 6
Pleasanton, CA 94566
RE:
PLN2001-00133
1512 Walnut Drive
Site and Architectural Review Application
Dear Mr. Munn:
Thank you for your submittal for the construction of a new single-family residence at 1512
Walnut Drive.. This property is located in the San Tomas Neighborhood and is subject to the
development standards of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan (STANP). The granting of a
Site and Architectural Review Permit will require approval by the Planning Commission and will
be decided upon at a public hearing.
Your application has been deemed incomplete. Additional information and details are needed in
order to deem your application complete. Once your application is deemed complete you will be
scheduled for the next available Planning Commission hearing. These items are as follows:
1. PreliminarY Title Report
2. Site Plan - The site plan submitted is incomplete and does not meet the submittal
requirements. The following information needs to be included on the site plan:
a. Recorded or proposed easements/dedications.
b. The species of the 32" diameter tree in the front yard that is proposed to be removed.
C. Location and species of all required seven trees.
d. Location of all existing buildings to be removed.
3. Proposed Second Unit - The proposed second unit does not meet the minimum setback
requirements for a living unit. All yards, building height, distance between buildings,
setbacks, lot coverage, and floor area ratio of the zone in which the property is located shall
apply to second units.
4. Existing Garage - The rear yard setback for the existing garage does not meet the minimum
setback requirements for a detached accessory structure. Additionally, either this structure or
the proposed second unit structure must be reduced to a maximum of 200 square feet.
-----~~-_._-----~-
70 :--';"nn ¡:'c<,t ';tr,,<.:(
Cllnrhe!! C,lihrfll;1 95008.1 ~)o
!h 408 S66,~ ¡ 40
C\.\f()8'366'33'31
Il;l) 408866.2790
PLN2001-00I33
1512 Wa
. Drive
Page 2 of 2
...................................................................................................""""..""",..,."",.",.,-""""""",.""",..,.,..""-"""""""""",,,..............................................................................................................
5. Architecture - Staff recommends that you remove the comer returns in order to simplify the
elevations.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at (408) 866-2143 or via email at
stephan iew(Zvci .campbe II.ca. us.
Sincerely,
~nlk ~
Stephanie Willsey
Project Planner
cc:
GeoffBradIey, Senior Planner
Roy & Adrienne Divittorio, 5846 Marshwell Way, San Jose, CA 95130
August 22,2001
Mr. Greg Munn
Design Tech Associates
90 Mission Drive-STE 6
Pleasanton, CA 94566
RE:
PRE2001-00039
1512 Walnut Drive
Site and Architectural Review Permit Request
Dear Mr. Munn:
Thank you for your pre-application submittal for the demolition of the existing residence and the
construction of a new single-family residence at 1512 Walnut Drive. The property is presently zoned R-1-
10 and is designated as Low Density Residential on the City's General Plan Land Use Map which allows a
density range of less than 3.5 units per gross acre. This property is located in the San Tomas Neighborhood
and is subject to the development standards of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan (STANP). The
granting of a Site and Architectural Review Pennit will require approval by the Planning Commission and
will be decided upon at a public hearing.
The Planning Division completed the reVIew of the pre-application and has the following comments
regarding the proposal:
1.
Landscaping
.
As part of the Site and Architectural Review application, provide a conceptual landscaping
plan which shows the type and size of the proposed and existing plantings. Please indicate
which trees on the site are to be removed.
.
The large tree located in the front yard setback is not shown on the plans. Please show the
size and species of this tree on the landscape plan. Staff recommends that this tree be retained
due to its mature state and to help minimize the visual impacts of the new home from the
street.
.
The San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan requires one tree to be planted for every 2,000
square feet of property area. Since the parcel is 13 ,500 square feet, you will need to indicate
locations for 7 trees on the plans (you may include existing trees that are to remain.)
2.
Architecture:
The following requests are intended to ensure compliance with the San Tomas Area Neighborhood
Plan Design Guidelines:
.
The perceived scale and mass of new homes should be compatible with homes in the
surrounding area. The homes in the neighborhood are predominantly single-story. Staff
70 North First Street. Campbell, California 95008-1436
TEL 408.866.2140 . FAX 408.866.8381 . TDD 408.866.2790
PRE2001-00039 1512, ~1nut Drive Page 2 of 2
,.....................................................................................................""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'OO'OO""OOOO'oooooooooooo...""""""'OOOO"'OO'OO"OO'OOOO"""""""""'OOOO"'oooooooooo........oo...oo...............oo....
recommends that the overall height of the structure be reduced to help minimize the perceived
mass of the home in comparison to the adjacent single-story homes.
.
New homes should incorporate representative architectural features of homes found in the San
Tomas Area. Simple rooflines, such as gabled or hipped roofs, are the most common roof
forms found in this area. Staff recommends that the complex roof-lines be simplified to meet
this design requirement.
.
Single-family homes should reduce the size of driveways and the size of the garages to the
minimum required for access and to meet the covered parking requirement. The reduction in
the size of driveways reduces the amount of impervious surface area and allows for more
landscaping and on-site water percolation. Staff recommends that the detached garage be
removed and the access driveway landscaped to provide more pervious surface area.
3.
Detached Structures
.
A search of our building permit records shows no record of a building permit for the existing
storage structure and detached garage in the rear of the property. Please provide staff with
proof that these structures were legally built with a building permit.
Your application was distributed to the Public Works Department, Building Division, Planning Division,
and the County Fire Department. In addition to the Planning Division comments contained in this letter,
please find enclosed comments and preliminary conditions of approval from the Building Division.
Comments from the City's Public Works Department were not ready at the time of this mailing so they will
come under separate cover. Please note that these comments are meant to be preliminary. Conditions of
approval from each department will be developed when the Site and Architectural Review application is
submitted.
Thank you for the opportunity to review these plans. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (408) 866-
2l43 or via email at stephaniew@.ci.campbell.ca.us to schedule a meeting to discuss these comments and
the application process.
Sincerely,
~~ Wiuw¡-
Stephanie Willsey
Project Planner
Encl:
Site and Architectural Review Permit Application
Building Inspection Division Comments, 8/20/2001
cc:
Geoff Bradley, Senior Planner
Adrienne Divittorio, 5846 Marshwell Way, San Jose, CA 95130
r