Builder Wants City to Allow Homes Despite Change in Rule
Proposal in weeks prior to Measure G start date
Moratorium in effect
By Kara Chalmers
In the next few weeks, the Saratoga Planning Commission must make its first decision on a partially residential development in a commercial zone since residents agreed not to allow such a move.
Measure G, passed by voters in November, is a moratorium on residential development in the city's commercial zones. It will not expire until March 15, 2002.
But before the moratorium was passed, this type of development was allowed, as long as the developer obtained a conditional-use permit from the planning commission.
In one case, the developer, Stan Gamble, president of Trafalgar Homes, submitted his application for a six-unit, mixed-use subdivision on Big Basin Way on March 1--14 days before the city started applying the moratorium to such developments. But commissioners hinted during their meeting on Jan. 24, that they would take measure G into account when making a decision on the project.
Measure G won 8,841 "yes" votes out of a total of 12,007 votes in this November's election, meaning that 73.6 percent of people who voted on the measure supported it. Proponents touted the importance of preserving the small amount of land in Saratoga that's zoned commercial--only 1 percent of the city's land. They pointed out that while it may be easy to convert commercial spaces into homes, once that happens, it is difficult to convert homes back to commercial spaces. They said they were afraid of Saratoga turning into a bedroom community.
The measure only applies to applications submitted to the city after March 15, 2000.
"It's not applicable here," said City Planner Mark Connolly about Measure G. "But the fact that a moratorium was put in place means the issue can't be ignored."
While Measure G technically does not apply to the development, the commission still must consider the overall balance between commercial and residential space in the proposal, Commissioner George Roupe noted at the meeting on Jan. 24.
He added that the passage of Measure G shows that the general will of Saratogans is to retain the small amount of commercial space there is in the city.
Commission Chairman Chuck Page noted that if the developer had not submitted his application before March 15, the city would have had to reject the project outright.
"If the measure were in place, it wouldn't even be before us," he said. He added that the commission would take the Village Plan guidelines into account when deliberating the project.
Commissioners hinted on Jan. 24, that they might ask the developer to alter his plans to allow for more commercial space and less residential, given the goals of the Village Plan and the city's policy of minimizing residential development in commercially zoned areas.
But Gamble said he wants as many townhouses as possible, to make the plan financially viable. He also said the demand for retail and office space in the Village area isn't as high as the demand for residential space.
The site, located at 14612 Big Basin Way, where BullPen Books is today, is 22,582 square feet in total, and it extends back to St. Charles Street, which runs parallel to Big Basin Way. At the site today there are four structures--the bookstore and three homes behind it--that would be demolished.
The site is unique in that it is actually two legal lots of record. One lot fronts on Big Basin Way and is zoned commercial--specifically 'Historical Commercial'. The city's zoning law allows residential units in this lot.
The other lot fronts on St. Charles Street and is zoned multifamily residential. According to zoning law, the maximum number of residential units allowed on this size area is three, which is what the developer has proposed for this lot. The applicant has not asked to change the zoning of either lot.
As proposed, the developer's plans call for the building on Big Basin Way to have a 1,316-square-foot first floor retail space and a second floor townhouse. Five more townhouses would extend behind the Big Basin Way building, up to St. Charles Street. The exterior materials proposed are beige stucco on top of brick veneer, with dark beige and green trim and accents and a slate roof.
Connolly said he doesn't think the commission will approve the proposed plan, especially since allowing all six units would probably entail removing a tree that the city arborist has deemed "exceptional." Exceptional specimens of trees must be retained in their current conditions at all costs, according to the arborist's report.
Taking out a townhouse would also allow more open space and would provide a better transition from the development to the single-family homes on St. Charles and surrounding streets, Connolly said, which is why staff has recommended keeping the tree.
According to the arborist's report, the plan as proposed would impact 14 trees, three of which are exceptional.
The project is outside of the Village's parking districts, which means it lends itself completely to on-site parking, according to Connolly. Gamble has included enough parking spaces in the plan, but if the commission compels him to increase the amount of commercial space, he would have to include more on-site parking spaces, as well.
In addition, according to the Americans With Disabilities Act, if there is to be commercial space on the second floor of the front building, Gamble would be required to include an elevator in the plans and handicapped parking spaces on-site, Connolly noted.
Parking will be a difficult issue for the commission to deal with, according to Page, since there is a question of how much more traffic the downtown can handle. He also said that he would not like to see the back of the site turned into a parking lot.
"I'm interested in parking," Page said. "I'm interested in doing what's right."
According to Gamble, more parking spaces, for increased retail, or for handicapped spaces, or for both, would most likely preclude one of his planned units. He said the loss of any of the townhouses would have a substantial economic impact.
Some six residents spoke on the proposal at the Jan. 24 meeting. The owners of the development next door to the proposal's site, S. and Malini Srinivasan, took issue with the plan's conversion of commercial space to residential and its number of townhouses. They said the proposal would increase traffic and destroy the views from their townhouse complex.
The commission took testimony, from Gamble and from the residents, discussed the project and continued it for a study session on Feb. 14 at 6 p.m. At that time, the commission will decide whether or not to grant design review approval, subdivision map approval and variance approval for a rear yard setback.
Saratoga, California Since 1955
