Attachment 02TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT
MEETING DATE: 07/26/2017
ITEM NO: 4
DESK ITEM
DATE: JULY 26, 2017
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATION S-16-052 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION ND-17-001. PROJECT LOCATION: 26 ALPINE AVENUE.
APPLICANT: TOM SLOAN. PROPERTY OWNER: TOBY AND SUSAN COREY.
REQUESTING APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
AND REMOVE A LARGE PROTECTED TREE ON VACANT PROPERTY ZONED R-
1:20. APN 529-37-042.
DEEMED COMPLETE: JUNE 27, 2017
FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION: DECEMBER 27, 2017
REMARKS:
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project by the
Town's Environmental Consultant, Kimley-Horn and Associates (available online at
www.losgatosca.gov/26Alpine). The 30-day public review period began on June 23, 2017 and
ended on July 24, 2017. Exhibit 16 includes a response to comments received on the MND.
Exhibit 17 includes neighborhood letters of support for the project and Exhibit 18 includes public
comments received after distribution of the July 26, 2017 Staff Report.
EXHIBITS:
Previously received under separate cover:
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration
Previously received with July 26, 2017 Staff Report:
2. Location Map
3. Required Findings and Considerations (one page)
4. Recommended Conditions of Approval (14 pages)
PREPARED BY:
JOCELYN PUGA
Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 • 408-354-6874
www.losgatosca.gov
ATTACHMENT 2
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: 26 ALPINE AVENUE/S-16-052 AND ND-17-001
JULY 26, 2017
5. Project Description, received July 20, 2017 (two pages)
6. Letter of Justification, received July 20, 2017 (six pages)
7. Consulting Architect's Report, received August 29, 2016 (five pages)
8. Applicant's Arborist Report, dated June 26, 2016 (21 pages)
9. Consulting Arborist's Peer Review Report, dated November 8, 2016 (two pages)
10. Applicant's Addendum to Arborist Report, dated January 17, 2017 (one page)
11. Color and Material Sheet, received August 3, 2016 (one page)
12. Errata Sheet (two pages)
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (seven pages)
14. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, July 21, 2017
15. Development Plans, received July 3, 2017 (29 sheets)
Received with this Desk Item:
16. Public Comments and Responses Regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ten
pages)
17. Neighborhood Letters of Support, received July 25, 2017 (five pages)
18. Public Comments received between 11:01 a.m. Thursday, July 20, 2017 and 11:00 a.m.
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Alpine 26 DESK.docx 7/26/2017 11:23 AM
PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES REGARDING
DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND
INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMFNTAI CHECKLIST
26 Alpine Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S-16-052
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration ND 17-001
July 2017
Prepared for:
Town of Los Gatos
Community Development Department
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Prepared by:
Kimley-Horn and Associates
100 West San Fernando Street, Suite 250
San Jose, CA 95113
Kimley
EXHIBIT 16
Response to Comments -26 Alpine Avenue
Errata Sheet
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
26 Alpine Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S-16-052
Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-17-001
Changes and clarifications to the Initial Study (IS) text and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), as
outlined below, were initiated by staff subsequent to publication of the IS to add additional information
received after the release of the IS. None of the text changes result in new significant environmental
impacts not previously disclosed in the IS.
The following changes should be made in the IS and MND dated June 2017 (added text is underlined and
deleted text is shown as eeut):
CUL-1: Archaeological Resources and Human Remains.
MND, page 6, and IS, pages 43 and 44, Mitigation Measure CUL-1:
Prior to the issuance of any building permits or grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, evidence that the following measures have been
completed or have been incorporated into the construction documents.
In order to avoid impacts to archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources and human remains during
project implementation, the measures outlined below shall be implemented. With the incorporation of the
following measures, significant impacts on these species would be avoided.
a. In the event that archaeological traces or tribal cultural resources are encountered, all
construction within a SD -meter radius of the find will be halted, the Community
Development Director will be notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine
the find and make appropriate recommendations.
b. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The
Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the Coroner
determines the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native American
Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native
Americans.
July 2017
Response to Comments —26 Alpine Avenue
c. if the Community Development Director finds that the archaeological find or Tribal cultural
resource is not a significant resource, work will resume only after the submittal of a
preliminary archaeological report and after provisions for reburial and ongoing
monitoring are accepted. Provisions for identifying descendants of a deceased Native
American and for reburial will follow the protocol set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5( e). if the site is found to be a significant archaeological site, a mitigation program
will be prepared and submitted to the Community Development Director for consideration
and approval, in conformance with the protocol set forth in Public Resources Code Section
21083.2.
A final report shall be prepared when a find is determined to be a significant archaeological site,
and/or when Native American remains are found on the site. The final report will include
background information on the completed work, a description and list of identified resources, the
disposition and curation of these resources, any testing, other recovered information, and
conclusions.
Tribal Cultural Resources
IS, page 64, paragraphs 1 and 2:
Tribal cultural resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k) have not been previously
identified within the project site and are considered unlikely to be present given the sloped topography
of the site. The project site is undeveloped and does not contain any existing structures or extant
historical tribal cultural resources with the potential for inclusion on the California Register of Historical
Resources or a local register. Furthermore, the Town has not been contacted by any tribes who are
traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the Town pursuant to Public Resources
Code section 21080,3 subd. (b).
Mitigation Measure CUL-1 has been included with the project to ensure construction activities are halted
if archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources, or human remains are discovered. As such, potential
impacts on historic tribal cultural resources are considered less than significant.
July 2017 ii
Response to Comments —26 Alpine Avenue
Written Comments and Responses
Index to Response to Comments
All letters received during the public review period for the Notice of Intent to adopt the
proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration are listed in the table, index of Comments Received,
below. Each comment letter is reproduced in its entirety with the issues of concern numbered
in the left margin. Correspondingly numbered responses to the comments follow each letter.
Index of Comments Received
Letter
Cornmenter
A
Native American Heritage Commission
July 2017 lii
S1'A'{F OF r:AL IFORNIA
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
Environmental and Cultural Department
1660 Harbor Blvd, Bulls 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
Phone (916) 373-3710
Fax (916) V3-5471
July 11, 2017
Jocelyn Puga
Town of Los Gatos
110 East Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95113
Sent via a -mail: jpuga@losgatosca.gov
Edmund G Brawn Jr. Governor
Re: SCHa 2017062059, Proposed 26 Alpine Avenue; S16-052, ND-17-001 Project, Town of Los Gatos; Santa Clara County,
California
Dear Ms. Pugs:
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project
referenced above. The review included the Project Description, the Evaluation of Environmental Impacts, Cultural Resources
and Tribal Cultural Resources sections, and Mitigation Measures prepared by lCm(ey-Hom & Associates for the Town of Los
Gatos. We have the following concerns:
2.
There is no documentation of government-to-govemment consultation by the lead agency under AB-52 with Native
American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated to the project area as required by statute, or that mitigation
measures were developed in consultation with the tribes. Discussions under AB-52 may include the type of document
prepared; avoidance, minimization of damage to resources; and proposed mitigation. Contact by consultants during the
Cultural Resources Assessments is not formal consultation.
There are no mitigation measures specifically addressing inadvertent finds of Tribal Cultural Resources separately.
Mitigation measures must take Tribal Cultural Resources into consideration as required under AH-52, with or without
consultation occurring. Mitigation language for archaeological resources is not always appropriate for or similar to
measures specifically for handling Tribal Cultural Resources. Sample mitigation measures can be found In the
California Natural Resources Agency {2016) "Final Text for tribal cultural resources update to Appendix G:
Environmental Checklist Form," http:liresources.ca,govicechaidors!`ab52fClean-final-Af -b -Aorrt -text-Submittedooir
3. Tribal Cultural Resources assessments are not documented. These should adequately assess the existence and
significance of tribal cultural resources and plan for avoidance, preservation in place, or barring both, mitigation of
project -related Impacts to tribal cultural resources. The lack of documented resources does not preclude
inadvertent finds, which should be addressed in the mitigation measures.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)1, specifically Public Resources Code section 21084.1, states that a project
that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource Is a project that may have a significant
effect on the environment.2 If there is substantial evidence. in light of the whole record before a lead agency, that a project may
have a significant effect on the environment, an environmental impact report (EIR) shall be prepared.3 In order to determine
whether a project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, a lead agency will need 10
determine whether there are historical resources with the area of project effect (APE).
CEQA was amended in 2014 by Assembly BIII 52. (AB 52).4 AB 52 applies to any project for which a notice of preparation
or a notice of negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration Is filed on or after July 1, 2015. AB 52 created a
separate category for "tribal cultural resources"5, that now includes "a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.e Public
agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource.' Your project may also be subject to
Senate Blli 18 (SB 18) (Burton, Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004), Government Code 65352.3, if it also involves the adoption of or
amendment to a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation or proposed designation of open space. Both SB 18 and
AB 52 have tribal consultation requirements. Additionally, if your project is also subject to the federal National Environmental
' Pub. Resources Code 9 21000 el seq.
Pub. Resources Code § 21084.1; Cal_ Code Regs.. tit 14, § 15064.5 (b); CEOA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (b)
Pub. Resources Code § 21080 (d); Cal. Code Regs., tit 14, § 15064 subd.(e)(1); CECIA Guidelines § 15064 (a)(1)
Government Code 65352.3
9 Pub. Resources Code § 21074
8 Pub. Resources Code § 21084.2
'Pub Resources Code § 21084.3 (a)
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.) (NEPA), the tribal consultation requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 19668 may also apply.
Consult your legal counsel about compliance with AB 52 and SB 18 as well as compliance with any other applicable
laws.
Agencies should be aware that AB 52 does not preclude agencies from initiating tribal consultation with trines that are
traditionally and culturally affiliated with their jurisdictions before the timeframes provided in AB 52. For that reason, we urge you
to continue to request Native American Tribal Consultation Lists and Sacred Lands File searches from the NAHC. The request
forms can be found online at: jf ap://nahc.ca.gov/resources/for'ms/. Additional information regarding AB 52 can be found online
at hito:l/nahcca c- • antent/uptoadsl2Q15/10/AB52IribalConsujtation CaIEQAPDF.pdt, entitled 'Tribal Consultation Under
AB 52: Requirements and Best Practices".
The NAHC recommends lead agencies consult with all California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally
affiliated with the geographic area of your proposed project as early as possible in order to avoid inadvertent discoveries of
Native American human remains and best protect tribal cultural resources.
A brief summary of portions of Aid 52 and SB 18 as well as the NAHC's recommendations for conducting cultural resources
assessments is also attached.
Please contact me at gayle.totton@nahc.ca.gov or call (916) 373-3710 it you have any questions.
Sincerely,
otton, B.S., MA, Ph.D
ssociate Governmental Project Analyst
Attachment
cc: State Clearinghouse
b 154 U.S.C. 300101, 36 C.F.R. § BOO et seq.
2
Pertinent Statutory Information:
Under AS 52:
AB 52 has added to CEQA the additional requirements listed below, along with many other requirements:
Within fourteen (14) days of determining that an application for a project Is complete or of a decision by a public agency to
undertake a project:a lead agency shall provide formal notification to a designated contact of, or tribal representative of,
traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice.
A lead agency shall begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving a request for consufatlon from a California
Native American tribe that la traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project.° and prior to
the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration or environmental Impact report. For purposes of AB
52, "consultation shall have the same meaning as provided in Gov. Code § 65. .4 (SR 18).10
The following taplos of consultation, if a tribe requests to discuss them, are mandatory topics of consultation:
a. Alternatives to the project.
b. Recommended mitigation measures.
c. Significant effects."
1. The following topics are discretionary topics of consultation:
a. Type of environmental review necessary.
b. Significance of the tribal cultural resources.
c. Significance of the project's impacts on tribal cultural resources.
If necessary, project alternatives or appropriate measures for preservation or mitigation that the tribe may recommend to the
lead agency. 2
With some exceptions, any Information, including but not limited to, the location, description, and use of tribal cultural resources
submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process shall not be Included In the
environmental document or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency to the public,
consistent with Government Code sections 8254 (r) and 6264.10. Any Information submitted by a California Native
American tribe during the consultation or environmental review process shall be published In a oontldentlal appendix to the
environmental document unless the tribe that provided the information consents, in writing, to the disclosure of some or ail of the
information to the public.18
If a protect may have a significant impact on a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency's environmental document shall
discuss both of the following:
a. Whether the proposed project has a significant impact on an Identified tribal cultural resource.
b. Whether feasible alternatives or mitigation measures, Including those measures that may be agreed to pursuant to
Public Resources Cade section 21082.3, subdlviebn (a), avoid or substantially lessen the Impact on the Identified
trial cultural resource 14
Consultation with a tribe shall be considered concluded when either of the following occurs:
a. The parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect, 4 a significant effect exists, on a tribal
cultural resource; or
b. A party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes That mutual agreement cannot be reached.15
Any mitigation measures agreed upon In the consultation concfurcted pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2
shall be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document and In an adopted mitigation monitoring and
reporting program, if determined to avoid or lessen the imact pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21082,3,
subdivision (b), paragraph 2, and shall be fully enforceable.'
If mitigation measures recommended by the staff of the Iead agency as a result of the consultation process are not included in
the environmental document or if there are no agreed upon mitigation measures at the conclusion of consultation, or if
consultation does not occur, and if substantial evidence demonstrates that a project will cause a significant effect to a tribal
cultural resource, the Iead agency shall consider feasible mlltgatlon pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21084.3
(b).17
An environmental Impact report may not be certified, nor may a mklgated negative declaration or a negative declaration be
adopted unless one of the following occurs:
a. The consultation process between the tribes and the Iead agency has occurred as provided in Public Resources
Code sections 21080.3.1 and 21080.3.2 and concluded pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080 3.2.
b. The tribe that requested consultation fatted to provide comments to the Iead agency or otherwise failed to engage
in the consultation process.
Pub. Rescue Gads fl 21080.3.11 eubds. (d) aril (e)
9Q Pus. Resources Code § 21080.3.1 (b)
11 Pub. Reecurwa Cade § 21080.32 (a)
12 Pub. Reeouro s Code § 21080.3.2 (a)
" Pub. Resources Cade § 21082.3 (C)(1)
" Pub. Resources Code Il 21082.3 (b)
Pub. Resources Code § 21080.3.2 (b)
* Pub. Resources Code 4 210823 (e)
' Pub. Resources Cade § 210823 (e)
3
c. The lead agency provided notice of the project to the tribe in compliance with Public Resources Code section
21080.3.1 (d) and the tribe tailed to request consultation within 30 days.l"
This process should be documented in the Tribal Cultural Resources section of your environmental document.
Under SB 18:
Government Code § 65352.3 (a) (1) requires consultation with Native Americans on general plan proposals for the purposes of
"preserving or mitigating impacts to places, features, and objects described § 5097.9 and § 5091.993 of the Public Resources
Code that are located within the city or county's jurisdiction. Government Code § 65560 (a), (b), and (c) provides for
consultation with Native American tribes on the open -space element of a county or city general plan for the purposes of
protecting places, features, and objects described in Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the Public Resources Code.
• SB 18 applies to local governments and requires them to contact, provide notice to, refer plans to, and consult with tribes
prior to the adoption or amendment of a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation of open space. Local
governments should consult the Governor's Office of Planning and Research's "Tribal Consultation Guidelines," which can
be found online at: httos://www.opr.ca.govidocs/09 14 05 Updated Guidelines 922.p t
• Tribal Consultation: If a local government considers a proposal to adopt or amend a general plan or a specific plan, or to
designate open space it is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the NAHC by requesting a "Tribal
Consultation List." If a tribe, once contacted, requests consultation the local government must consult with the tribe on the
plan proposal. A tribe has 90 days from the date of receipt of notification to request consultation unless a shorter
timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe.19
• There is no Statutory Time Limit on Tribal Consultation under the law.
• Confidentiality: Consistent with the guidelines developed and adopted by the Office of Planning and Research,22 ttie city or
county shall protect the confidentiality of the information concerning the specific identity, location, character, and use of
places, features and objects described in Public Resources Code sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 that are within the city's or
county's jurisdiction.21
Conclusion Tribal Consultation: Consultation should be concluded at the point in which:
o The parties to the consultation come to a mutual agreement concerning the appropriate measures for preservation
or mitigation; or
o Either the local government or the tribe, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual
agreement cannot be reached concerning the appropriate measures of preservation or mitigation 22
NAHC Recommendations for Cultural Resources Assessments:
• Contact the NAHC for:
o A Sacred Lands File search. Remember that tribes do not always record tnew sacred sites in the Sacred Lands
File, nor are they required to do so. A Sacred Lands File search is not a substitute for consultation with tribes that
are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project's APE.
o A Native American Tribal Contact List of appropriate tribes for consultation concerning the project site and to assist
in planning for avoidance, preservation in place, or, failing both, mitigation measures.
• The request form can be found at
• Contact the appropriate regional California Historical Research Information System (CHRIS) Center
(http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?oage €d=1088) for an archaeological records search. The records search will determine:
o If part or the entire APE has been previously surveyed tor cultural resources.
o If any known cultural resources have been already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE.
o If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE.
o If a survey Is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.
If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the
findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey.
o The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measures should be submitted immediately
to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and
associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum and not be made available for public
disclosure.
o The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate
regional CHRIS center.
1e Pub. Resources Code § 21082.3 (d)
" (Gov. Code § 55352.3 (a)(2)).
pursuant to Gov. Code section 65040.2,
21 (Gov. Code § 65352.3 (b)).
22 (Tribal Consultation Guidelines, Governor's Office o1 Planning and Research (2005) at p. 18).
4
Letter A — Native American Heritage Commission
A-1 The Town acknowledges and appreciates this comment. The Town was not contacted by any of the
tribes who are traditionally and culturally affiliated with a geographic area of the Town pursuant to
Public Resources Code section 21080.3 subd. (bj. The Town also appreciates the resources
provided by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHG) to facilitate tribal consultation in
the future. Additionally, the Town has made changes to the document to address the commenters
concerns regarding language pertaining to consultation with tribes in relation to tribal and cultural
resources. Based on the comment by NAHC, paragraphs 1 and 2 of page 64 of the Initial Study and
have been changed. These changes do not alter the findings or change the significance of an
impact previously disclosed. The changes to the document are reflected below by the underlined
text.
Tribal cultural resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k) have not been
previously identified within the project site and are considered unlikely to be present given the
sloped topography of the site. The project site is undeveloped and does not contain any
existing structures or extant historical tribal cultural resources with the potential for inclusion
on the California Register of Historical Resources or a local register. Furthermore. the Town
has not been contacted by any tribes who are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the
geographic area of the Town pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3 subd. (b).
Mitigation Measure CUL-1 has been included with the project to ensure construction activities
are halted if archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources, or human remains are
discovered. As such, potential impacts on historic tribal cultural resources are considered less
than significant.
A-2 As discussed in Comment A-1 above, the Town was not contacted by any of the tribes who are
traditionally and culturally affiliated with a geographic area of the Town pursuant to Public
Resources Code section 21080.3 subd. (b). Additionally, the Town has made changes to the
document to address the commenters concerns regarding mitigation language to address tribal and
cultural resources. Based on the comment by NAHC, paragraphs 1 and 2 of page 64 of the Initial
Study and have been changed. These changes do not alter the findings or change the significance
of an impact previously disclosed. The changes to Mitigation Measure CUL -1 are reflected below
by the underlined text.
CUL-1: Archaeological Resources and Human Remains.
MND, page 6, and IS, pages 43 and 44, Mitigation Measure CUL-1:
Prior to the issuance of any building permits or grading permits, the applicant shall submit to
the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, evidence that the following
measures have been completed or have been incorporated into the construction documents.
In order to avoid impacts to archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources and human
remains during project implementation, the measures outlined below shall be implemented.
26 Alpine Avenue 1 July 2017
Responses to Public Comments
With the incorporation of the following measures, significant impacts on these species would
be avoided.
a. in the event that archaeological traces or tribal cultural resources are encountered, al!
construction within a 50-meter radius of the find will be halted, the Community
Development Director will be notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine the
find and make appropriate recommendations.
b. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The
Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the Coroner
determines the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native American
Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native
Americans.
c. if the Community Development Director finds that the archaeological find or tribal cultural
resource is not a significant resource, work will resume only after the submittal of a
preliminary archaeological report and after provisions for reburial and ongoing monitoring
are accepted. Provisions for identifying descendants of a deceased Native American and
for reburial will follow the protocol set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5( e). If the
site is found to be a significant archaeological site, a mitigation program will be prepared
and submitted to the Community Development Director for consideration and approval, in
conformance with the protocol set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2.
A final report shall be prepared when a fend is determined to be a significant archaeological
site, and/or when Native American remains are found on the site. The final report will
include background information on the completed work, a description and list of identified
resources, the disposition and curation of these resources, any testing, other recovered
information, and conclusions.
26 Alpine Avenue 2 July 2017
Responses to Public Comments
Phil & Melanie
Branon
July 19, 2017
Dear Los Gatos Planning Commission,
121 Alpine Ave, Los Gatos, CA 95030
phil.branon@gmail.com
Melanie and I have seen and reviewed the architectural plans for Susan and Toby
Corey's planned new home at 26 Alpine Ave. We are in complete support of this
project.
As 30-year residents of Alpine Ave, we're excited to see this lot developed in a manner
that respects and utilizes the slope and shape of this property. The design has an
extremely low profile, is of modest size, and blends very nicely with the foliage on the
property.
We hope you agree and grant the necessary approval/permissions/permits to allow
them to proceed with the construction of what will be a great addition to the
neighborhood and the town.
Best Regards,
(914.i
Phil & Melanie Branon
EXHIBIT 17
From: David Zicovich livid = `:_ covich corn
aubjCt: Corey Residence
Dato: July 24, 2017 at 9:10 AM
To: David Zicovich 'zicovich.c :m
To the LG Town Council„
We are owners of 19 Alpine Ave.. directly across the street from the Corey's project.
We are happy to support our new neighbors development of their lot.
Amy McCafferty and Ed Hofer
Amy McCafferty
Broker Associate
Alain Pinei Realtors
408 387-3227
amccafferty.com
BRE #00967324
David Zicovich
Zicovich Builders, Inc.
(408)399-0606
(408) 399-9175 fax
•
July 21, 2017
To whom it may concern,
We support the project proposed at 26 Alpine Ave. Los Gatos 95030.
The current design fits nested into hillside and would not affect the neighborhood
character.
We have used Zicovich Builders with our current project and previous past
projects. Zicovich produces high quality projects while being mindful and
available to address neighbors concerns over the duration of the project including
minimizing street parking.
Best,
Dombrowski's
67 Alpine ave.
Los Gatos, CA 95030
r rnm- James Dorrian lirndorrnTnr"met com
tit)). :r ' Corey puns.
r } July 21, 2417 at 8:41 AM
Dave Zicovich rvy 1;:`2:1rnvich.c.nm
Dave,
The Corey plans look terrific. It looks perfect for the lot.
Best,
Jim
Sent from my Pad
u
acw:• Jon Perera i +`rw. • =-5.,,adrbe.cnm
ec'--•,: e i New Alpine Ave residence
r July20, 2017at8:55 PM
Hi David —
I like on Alpine Ave in Los Gatos. Just had the chance to see the proposed plans for the new
construction. The proposed home looks terrific. Really excited to see a more contemporary, fresh view
on Los Gatos homes. The proposed home looks like it will have a contemporary style while blending in
nicely with the street.
Regards,
Jon Perera
Resident, 66 Alpine Ave, Los Gatos, CA
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
July 24, 2017
Krista Gieselman
38 Alpine Avenue
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Nigel Belton
Consulting Arborist
Subject - A review of the potential impacts of the proposed residential construction work at 26 Alpine
Avenue, concerning the welfare of the mature Coast Live Oak situated on the shared property
boundary:
Dear Krista,
Thank you for asking me to meet with you last week at your property to discuss the potential impacts of
proposed grading and construction work on the neighbor's property at 26 Alpine Avenue.
The primary issue of concern is the welfare of the mature Coast Live Oak identified as tree #9 in the
preliminary tree preservation report and accompanying Tree Protection Map, prepared for the property
owner by Gareth Jones - Certified Arborist. The trunk of this tree transects the property boundary and
as such it owned by both you and your neighbor.
The other concern we discussed entailed the potential loss of screening and privacy to your residence
after the removal of the Coast Live Oak identified as Tree #12 in the project arborist's report. This tree
must be removed in order to facilitate the construction of the new residence. I downloaded and
reviewed the Civil and Architectural Plans and also reviewed the Project Arborists Report in preparation
for this letter.
Please be advised that I am concerned about the close proximity of the proposed grading and
excavation work required for this new home. The plans show that the footprint of the residence and
proposed retaining wall will be setback approximately 13-feet downhill from Tree #9 (the 26-inch DBH
Coast Live Oak on the boundary). I anticipate that there will be an over -excavation beyond the
foundation and retaining wall and in my experience, it could extend significantly closer to the trunk of
this tree, contingent on engineering requirements. I did not find any plan details showing the limits of
the required over -excavation but in some cases I have seen such work extend out an additional four or
more feet beyond the edge of foundations and retaining walls.
1'. l f livo, 1744
6.110
I'1i j I"ax (i$ 1 1 osm-1234
Aplo 1 A' tItil ((I t (i 71I(I
Page 1
ht.!tonnigoI'r,gi16a i ow
EXHIBIT 18
Subject - A review of the potential impacts of the proposed residential construction work at 26 Alpine
Avenue, concerning the welfare of the mature Coast Live Oak situated on the shared property
boundary:
I am concerned that the required excavation may actually extend as close as 9-feet or possibly even
closer, to the trunk of this tree. Such an excavation will encroach well within the Critical Root Zone area
as shown on the project arborist's Tree Protection Plan. This work will most likely entail a significant
amount of root Toss, which is a concern regarding future tree health and tree stability in the soil. I noted
that this tree exhibits a trunk lean and canopy weight bias towards the Gieselman's residence which
could contribute towards a tree failure in the event of significant root loss.
1 recommend that further investigation is made in order to determine the impacts of such root loss on
Tree #9. 1 recommend that the amount of over -excavation work required within the critical Root zone
of this tree is qualified before project approval. This information is required to guide further
investigation and recommendations regarding the preservation and stability of this oak.
Tree #12 is an 18-inch DBH Coast Live Oak. The required removal of this tree will reduce screening
between the Gieselman residence and the new home below.
I recommend that this concern regarding adequate screening between both residences is addressed in
a landscape planting plan a requirement of conditions of approval. The planting of appropriate
drought tolerant native trees and shrubs is recommended for this purpose.
Please contact me if you have any questions concerning this letter.
Respectfully submitted
N"I Belton
Attachments:
- Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
Photograph of Tree #9
Page 2
The 26-inch DBH Coast Live Oak located on the boundary of the Gieselman and Corey Properties at 38
and 26 Alpine Avenue, Los Gatos.
Prepared by Nigel Belton, Consulting Arborist - July 24, 2017
Jocelyn Puga
To:
Subject
Planning
RE: Application S-16-057, 26 Alpine Avenue
----Original Message --
From: Steve Rice [mailto:steverice@msn.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2017 2:49 PM
To: Planning
Subject: Application S-16-052, 26 Alpine Avenue
Planning Commissioners:
write to express my concerns about the above -referenced application. My residence is just up the street, on a similar
piece of property, and built next to the same creek. I went through this same process almost 30 years ago, and some of
the issues I worked through are still relevant today.
Before I discuss some of the technical issues, I want to address the architectural style of the proposed residence. Alpine
Avenue is a very old and established street. While most of the homes have been remodeled or updated over the years,
virtually all of the homes have a craftsman or classic style. This would be the first home on the street with such a
modern appearance, and while it might look great in many areas, it really will not fit into the surrounding neighborhood.
I disagree with the Consulting Architect's opinion that the design would be "complementary to the streetscape."
My concerns about the project in general are pretty simple. First, I believe there is far too much "cut" in the project.
Second, while I agree that building within the LRDA might well be impossible, measures could be taken to bring the
project closer to the LRDA. Finally, the impact on significant trees, both on the subject property and on the neighboring
property are both unnecessary and unacceptable.
The proposes over 1,500 cubic yards of excavation and removal. This is a massive amount of earth movement. This is
made necessary by the 1,500 square foot "cellar." Shrinking, or outright removal, of the cellar should be considered.
Removal of this much soil will have a detrimental effect on both the trees on the property, as well as the trees on the
neighboring property.
For many years, the Town has encouraged cellars as an alternative to additional square footage. In this case, I believe
that works against what is intended. The purpose of the policy is to avoid "visible" square footage. I understand and
agree with the intent, and it works well on more level lots. Unfortunately, when you have a steep hillside lot like this
one, that below ground square footage results in an unacceptable amount of earth moving. Removal of the cellar, and
an overall reduction in square footage for the project, would make for a more acceptable project.
Overall, the project could be made smaller, and would fit closer to the LRDA. The size of what would fit on this
particular lot has been the subject of several hearings over the years, and even dates back to the subdivision approval
itself. This proposal is just too large for what was intended when the subdivision was approved.
Finally, as proposed, the project has a significant and detrimental impact on the trees, both on the property, and on the
property next door. With this amount of earth movement, and with the proposed "water feature" so close to a Heritage
Oak near the property line with 38 Alpine, that tree would likely suffer irreparable harm.
In summary, I believe this lot can and should support a development project; however, this project has too many
negative impacts. The project should be denied as proposed. It cannot be simply amended or modified, it must be
redesigned from the ground up.
Thank you for your kind consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
Stephen M. Rice
54 Alpine Avenue
Los Gatos, CA. 95030
(408) 354-2575 F: (408) 354-2939
CeII: (408) 981-5555
SteveRice@msn.com
2
July 24, 2017
Dear Planning Commission:
We are unable to attend the Planning Commission this week, so thank you for reading
through our written comments on the proposed project at 26 Alpine.
As noted in the staff report, there have been several previous projects submitted for this
property. It is a challenging site, and we appreciate the efforts made by the current
property owner and development team to be sensitive to the potential impacts on our home
and quality of life.
We are the downhill neighbors to the north of the property. Our house faces Jackson Street
and our back fence is on Alpine, which is level with our second story.
Based on the visuals provided by the story poles, we are concerned about privacy/sight
lines from the proposed house -- especially the outdoor terrace on its northeast corner --
into our backyard, dining room, a second floor bedroom and bathroom. It is hard to
determine what screening will be in place once the identified trees are removed. We have
provided the builder with photos from the viewpoint of our house and we are included
them below for your background also.
It is also difficult to estimate the visual impact of the new home. We don't know how much
the modern -style exterior will blend into the hillside trees and vegetation, or if it will feel
imposing looking down on us because of its 29-foot height on top of a steep slope.
View from upstairs bedroom:
View from downstairs dining room:
View from backyard:
Should the Planning Commission approve this project as proposed, our request is to have
the Conditions of Approval clearly state the location of replacement trees and the
commitment to retain the natural vegetation that exists between the proposed house and
our property. This will be our best assurance that our privacy and quality of life will be
protected in the future when/if the house ownership changes.
Thank you.
Michael Crank
Diane Cronk
Jillian Cronk
27 Jackson Street, Los Gatos
Daytime phone: 408-354-1242
Mobile: 408-348-0523
Jocelyn Puga
From Krista Gieselman <gieselmankrista@me.com>
Sent Sunday, July 23, 2017 9:47 PM
To: david@zicovich.com; Jocelyn Puga
Subject Re: 26 Alpine Ave Renderings
Please add to 26 Alpine Avenue file.
As indicated in earlier email.
Jon met with Contractor and Architect on November 22, 2016 at 8:00pm.
Sincerely,
Krista Gieselman
Krista
908-400-1469
On Jul 23, 2017, at 8:06 PM, Krista Gieselman <gieselmankrista�?a,me.com> wrote:
Good Evening -
My name is Krista Gieselman, 38 Alpine Ave. I was talking to a neighbor, and they told me you could make view renderings from 38
Alpine Avenue (our home) to 26 Alpine Avenue before the meeting on Wednesday. It would be really helpful to see how much of the
home will be visible from our side, plus, the impact of the additional trees to be removed.
Please note, my husband met with you in November requesting similar information on chimney and roof heights. To date, we have
not received any requested information.
The building plans request many additional trees to be removed that will definitely impact our view and privacy from the two
balcony's (both marketed in the glossy sell sheets) and outdoor sitting area. I would also appreciated the drawings reflect the privacy
trees/bushes that will be placed on the fence line.
See marketing photos below.
Sincerely,
Krista Gieselman
1
iPact 13.
Downtown Los
Gatos Estate
Horne
38 Alpine Ave, Leas Gam
2:09 PM
tours.beyonclvtcoto
Offered at $5,145,000
Description
An elegantly designed and appointed home boasting unrivaled curb ap
downtown Los Gatos locations. Located on Alpine Avenue, one of the r
immediate access to downtown Los Gatos amenities, while offering th#
3
Righ! Sole of House with Fireplace l Disk
5
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank