Attachment 1 - July 26, 2017 Staff Report and Exhibits 1-6TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT
MEETING DATE: 07/26/2017
DATE: JULY 21, 2017
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
ITEM NO: 5
SUBJECT: TOWN CODE AMENDMENT APPLICATION A-17-002. PROJECT LOCATION:
TOWN WIDE. APPLICANT: TOWN OF LOS GATOS.
CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 29 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF
THE TOWN CODE REGARDING FENCES, HEDGES, AND WALLS.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider amendments to Chapter 29 (zoning
regulations) of the Town code regarding fences, hedges, and walls.
CEQA:
The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15061(b)(3), in that it can be seen with
certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to the Town Code will have
a significant effect on the environment.
FINDINGS:
■ As required, pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act, this project is Exempt, Section 15061(b)(3); and
■ That the Town Code amendments are consistent with the General Plan.
PREPARED BY:
Sean Mullin, AICP
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 1
PAGE 2 OF 5
SUBJECT: CONSIDER AMENDMENTS THE TOWN CODE REGARDING FENCES, HEDGES,
AND WALLS. TOWN CODE AMENDMENT/A-17-002
JULY 21, 2017
BACKGROUND:
On January 31, 2017, the Town Council held a Study Session to identify strategic priorities for
fiscal years 2017-2019. David Weissman requested that an Ordinance amendment regarding
fences in the Hillside Areas of the Town be set as a strategic priority. At the Study Session, four
Councilmembers identified hillside fences as a strategic priority.
The goals identified for amendments to the Town Code regarding hillside fences were:
• Make certain that fences do not interfere with wildlife corridors;
• Ensure fences do not impede movement of wildlife;
• Define an "open fence" as one that permits all animals, depending on their size, to
either climb under, pass through, or jump over, regardless of the fence's location
relative to the side, front, or rear yards;
• Specify that the installation of chicken wire, wire mesh, chain link, etc., over open slat
fences, is not considered animal -movement friendly; and
• Clarify that the requirements for fences apply to all hillside fences, not just to fences
associated with Architecture and Site applications.
In late March, David Weissman and Lee Quintana sent staff a draft Ordinance. Staff met with
David Weissman and Lee Quintana in May and June to discuss the proposed amendments. A
working draft Ordinance is included as Exhibit 3. Recognizing the differences in landscapes and
wildlife concerns, the draft Ordinance divides regulations for fences into two categories: non -
hillside properties; and hillside properties. The majority of the proposed regulations included in
the non -hillside properties section of the draft Ordinance reflect existing Ordinance language;
while the proposed regulations included in the hillside properties section of the draft Ordinance
reflect new Ordinance language.
ANALYSIS:
A. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the working draft Ordinance.
Staff has concerns with some of the proposed amendments, but looks forward to the
Planning Commission's discussion on the Ordinance amendments in general, and in
particular requests that the Planning Commission discuss the following topics:
• The appropriateness of the proposed "Vision Statement" language included under
Purpose and Intent (Exhibit 3, page 1: Purpose and Intent);
• Hillside fences would require Minor Residential Development approval at a current cost
of $2,223.00 [Exhibit 3, page 3: (A and B)(1)];
• The siting, design, and materials of hillside fences would be strictly regulated (Exhibit 3,
pages 3 and 4);
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Fences Amendments 07-26-17.docx 7/21/2017 1:06 PM
PAGE 3 OF 5
SUBJECT: CONSIDER AMENDMENTS THE TOWN CODE REGARDING FENCES, HEDGES,
AND WALLS. TOWN CODE AMENDMENT/A-17-002
JULY 21, 2017
• The design and height of hillside fencing would be dictated by its proximity to the
primary dwelling unit [Exhibit 3, page 3: (B)(4, 5, and 7)]. Fences over 42-inches tall
would be limited to an area within 30 feet of the residence [Exhibit 3, page 3: (B)]; and
• Replacement and modification of hillside fencing would be required to meet the new
regulations for hillside fences [Exhibit 3, page 4: (4)].
B. General Plan Policies and Actions
A number of General Plan Policies and Actions address fencing, preservation of wildlife
habitats, and protection of migration corridors. The relevant General Plan Policies and
Actions are included as Exhibit 4. The proposed Town Code amendments support the
referenced General Plan Policies and Actions by seeking to limit the impacts of fences
(fences, walls, gates, gateways, entry arbors, and hedges) in the Hillside Areas.
C. Existing Town Code
The current Town Code includes regulations for fences throughout the Town in Section
29.40.030. The current Town Code:
• Includes limited regulation of design and materials;
• Does not require permits for fences six -feet or less in height; and
• Does not differentiate between regulations for fences on hillside and non -hillside
properties.
D. Hillside Design Standards & Guidelines
The Hillside Design Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G) provide guidance for development
in the Town's Hillside Areas. The HDS&G include standards and guidelines for
incorporating fences in the Hillside Areas. The relevant standards and guidelines and an
excerpt from the HDS&G are included as Exhibit 5.
E. Effects on Properties
Q. Would fence regulations for non -hillside properties change?
A. Fence regulations for non -hillside properties would remain consistent with existing
regulations with only minor clarifications regarding appropriate materials for fences
[(Exhibit 3, page 2: (C)]. Permits would not be required for fences less than six -feet in
height on non -hillside properties [(Exhibit 3, page 2: (A)].
Q. Would I need a permit to construct a new fence on my hillside property?
A. Yes, the proposed Ordinance would require that a hillside property owner receive
approval of a Minor Residential Development application to construct any fence. The
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Fences Amendments 07-26-17.docx 7/21/2017 1:06 PM
PAGE 4 OF 5
SUBJECT: CONSIDER AMENDMENTS THE TOWN CODE REGARDING FENCES, HEDGES,
AND WALLS. TOWN CODE AMENDMENT/A-17-002
JULY 21, 2017
fee for a Minor Residential Development for minor projects is currently $2,223.00. A
building Permit would not be required for fences that do not exceed six -feet in height.
Q. Are there particular materials or designs for hillside fences that are not allowed under
the proposed Ordinance?
A. Yes, the proposed Ordinance prohibits specific materials and designs [Exhibit 3, pages
3 and 4, (6) and (7)]. It also requires that fences located greater than 30 feet from the
primary dwelling unit be of open -view design.
Q. Is the type of fencing allowed on a hillside property dependent on its location on the
property?
A. Yes, within the Hillside Areas of the Town, the proposed Ordinance breaks properties
into two zones: areas within 30 feet of the primary dwelling unit and areas greater
than 30 feet of the primary dwelling unit. This distinction aligns with the planting
zones described on page 26 of the HDS&G. Fences within Planting Zone 1 would be
regulated in the same manner as fences on non -hillside properties. Fences outside
this zone would be limited by specific regulations related to wildlife friendliness,
height (both maximum and minimum above grade), design, and siting. Walls, other
than retaining walls approved by the Town, would be prohibited unless needed to
address a specific privacy concern.
Q. My hillside property includes existing fencing that does not meet the standards
included in the proposed Ordinance. If I would like to replace or modify the existing
fencing, would it have to meet the proposed regulations?
A. Yes, replacement or modification of existing fencing that does not meet the proposed
requirements would have to meet the proposed Ordinance. Repair to sections of
existing fencing would be allowed and would not be required to meet the proposed
Ordinance; however, repair would be limited to short sections of fences within a 12-
month period.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Written comments have been received regarding the proposed amendments (Exhibit 6).
CONCLUSION:
A. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the proposed draft Ordinance
concerning fences and discuss the topics of concern raised by staff. Following the
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Fences Amendments 07-26-17.docx 7/21/2017 1:06 PM
PAGE 5 OF 5
SUBJECT: CONSIDER AMENDMENTS THE TOWN CODE REGARDING FENCES, HEDGES,
AND WALLS. TOWN CODE AMENDMENT/A-17-002
JULY 21, 2017
Planning Commission's discussion, staff recommends that the item be continued to a
date certain.
EXHIBITS:
1. Findings
2. Ordinance Priorities Memorandum dated February 12, 2017, from Robert Shultz, Town
Attorney
3. Draft Amendments to Chapter 29 of Town Code
4. General Plan Policies and Actions pertaining to Fences, wildlife habitats, and migration
corridors
5. Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines pertaining to fences
6. Public Comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, July 21, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Fences Amendments 07-26-17.docx 7/21/2017 1:06 PM
PLANNING COMMISSION —July 26, 2017
REQUIRED FINDINGS:
TOWN CODE AMENDMENT APPLICATION A-17-002
Consider amendments to Chapter 29 (Zoning Regulations) of the Town Code regarding fences,
hedges, and walls.
FINDINGS
Required Findings for CEQA:
It has been determined that there is no possibility that this project will have a significant
impact on the environment; therefore, the project is not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act, Section 15061 (b)(3): Review for exemption.
Required Findings for General Plan:
■ The Town Code amendments are consistent with the General Plan.
N:\DEV\FINDINGS\2017\Fences_Amend.docx
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor & Council
From: Robert Schultz, Town Attorney
Date: February 12, 2017
Subject: Ordinance Priorities as directed from the
January 31, 2017 Priority Setting Study Session
Based upon the input received at the Town Council Priority Setting Study Session on January
31, 2017, the Town Attorney's Office has reprioritized the ordinances that it will be working on
during the upcoming year as follows:
1. Tobacco Retail Ordinance
One of the 2015-2016 Strategic Goals and Priorities of the Town Council was to update the
Town's Smoking Regulations, last revised some 25 years ago. In that regard, on May 17, 2016
the Town Council adopted amendments to the Town's Smoking Regulations. The amendments
include provisions for prohibiting smoking in public places, commercial areas, and multi -unit
residences. During the discussion regarding the Town's Smoking Regulations, the Town Council
directed staff to also develop an ordinance to address regulating the sales of tobacco by
businesses in Los Gatos. In response, the Town Attorney along with the Town's Community
Outreach Coordinator obtained a grant for $20,000 from the County to implement our Town's
Smoking Regulations and is in the process of drafting amendments to the Tobacco Retail Sales
Ordinance.
The draft Tobacco Sales Ordinance will be presented to the Youth Commission in March for
a recommendation to Council in April and would establish a local licensing system for tobacco
retailers to ensure that retailers comply with tobacco control laws and business standards in order
to protect the health, safety, and welfare of our residents and to discourage violations of tobacco -
related laws, especially those that prohibit the sale or distribution of tobacco products to minors.
2. Secondary Unit Ordinance
The California Legislature passed three bills in 2016 that have substantive effects on the
existing regulatory framework for secondary (accessory) dwelling units and upon junior
accessory dwelling units. Towns/Cities and Counties throughout the state are now amending
their zoning ordinances in response to the new laws. State law requires ministerial or non -
discretionary review and approval of secondary dwelling units, subject to locally -adopted
standards that retained a very limited level of local discretion as to their content. In addition,
under the new state laws, secondary dwelling units are now required to be called "accessory
dwelling units" (ADU). These bills are intended to remove regulatory barriers that have so far
EXHIBIT 2
discouraged homeowners from constructing new second units and the Town's Municipal Code
needs to be updated to bring it in compliance with State regulations.
3. Density Bonus Ordinance
The California State Legislature passed a number of bills (AB 2501, AB 2442, AB 2556,
and AB 1934) in 2016 that substantially amended the residential housing density bonus statutes
promulgated under CGC Section 65915. Under the new State law, local jurisdictions are required
to amend their own affordable housing regulations (their zoning ordinances) to align with the
amended statutes. Although the basic premise of the density bonus remains the same, the newly
enacted legislation has thoroughly modified CGC 65915, with revised density bonus eligibility
parameters, expanded and more stringent zoning concession mandates, and broadened
applicability of the entire density bonus program (to now senior housing projects, mixed use
projects, and redevelopment projects, as well as more typical new residential housing projects).
Consequently, the Towns Density Bonus Ordinance must be rewritten.
4. Wireless Facilities Ordinance
The wireless telecommunications industry is expanding as citizens' demand more bandwidth
for the data they consume. The Federal and State governments are passing laws to help facilitate
expansion of wireless infrastructure. Companies such as Mobilite, Crown Castle and Zayo are
wireless infrastructure providers, which build large and small cell facilities to provide wireless
connectivity to carriers such as Verizon, Sprint, etc. These infrastructure companies are
approaching the Town of Los Gatos, as well as all other municipalities in the area, to expand
their infrastructure for the purpose of providing cellular connectivity currently as well as to begin
to contemplate the advent of 5G coverage, which requires different equipment than 4G.
The Town's current Wireless Facilities Ordinance was adopted in 2003 to conform to the
1996 Telecommunications Act and is now outdated based on the ongoing changes to State and
Federal legislation and leaves the Town unprepared for the scale of expansion that is on the
horizon. Our current Ordinance only deals with the collocation of wireless facilities on existing
utility poles. The above referenced wireless facility companies are now proposing installations in
the public right of way. Such installations could be on existing Town -owned structures, such as
street light poles, or could involve the companies putting in their own new poles. The Town
needs to update its wireless telecommunications ordinance to address the current status of
Federal and State law as well as to reflect best practices in siting and design standards to
preserve the aesthetics of the Town but to also facilitate providing competitive, varied and high
quality wireless communications service infrastructure.
5. Medical Marijuana Ordinance
In 2011, the Town adopted an ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana dispensaries,
cultivation, and delivery services. In November 2016, the voters passed Proposition 64, the
Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA"). The AUMA immediately
legalized the possession, transport, purchase, use, and transfer of recreational marijuana for
individuals 21 years of age or older. Other provisions, including State issued licenses for large
Page 2 of 6
scale cultivation, manufacturing, delivery and retail business, will be issued beginning January of
2018. Proposition 64 allows local governments to ban all marijuana -related businesses outright,
including marijuana dispensaries, delivery services, and any recreational marijuana retail
services and outdoor cultivation of marijuana, unless the California Attorney General determines
marijuana is no longer illegal under Federal law (if marijuana is federally legalized, outdoor
cultivation could be regulated, but not prohibited) and to reasonably regulate indoor cultivation
in private residences, but not ban it outright.
It is recommended that the Town Council needs to consider an Ordinance that amends the
Town's Municipal Code to recognize the new State pre-emption allowing individuals to have six
living marijuana plants and any marijuana produced by those plants in their homes. The
Ordinance also must modify language in the Town Code to update the ban to non -medical
cultivation, delivery, distribution and retail, and other provisions of AUMA.
6. Update of the General Plan Safety Element
In order to address fire protection and prevention, Senate Bill 1241 (SB 1241) mandates that
the Town's Safety Element be reviewed and updated as necessary to address the risk of fire for
State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) and very high fire hazard severity zones including review of
fire hazard severity zone maps. In general, SB 1241 requires that the Town's Safety Element
minimize fire risks and provide guidance on local decision -making to achieve this goal.
7. Hillside Fence Ordinance
Amend the requirements for fences in the hillside areas to make certain that fences do not
interfere with wildlife corridors and those fences do not impede the movement of wildlife. The
amendment would define an "open fence" as one that permits all animals, depending on their
size, to either climb under, pass through, or jump over any fence on the property, including side
and back yards, and not just a front yard fence and specify that chicken wire, wire mesh, chain
links, etc., over an open slat fence, is not considered animal- movement friendly. Clarify that the
fence requirements applies to all hillside fences, not just to a fence associated with an A&S
application.
7. Animal Ordinance
The Town's Animal Control Ordinance was adopted in 1971 and is very limited compared to
other municipalities. As a result, the Town's ordinance provides very little assistance in
enforcing animal issues. For example, the definitions of a dangerous or potentially dangerous
dog do not align with the definitions under State law and there is only an administrative
procedure related to a post -seizure hearing. Therefore, in order to declare a dog potentially
dangerous or dangerous in the absence of it being impounded, the Town's only recourse is to file
a court action. The Town's Animal Control Ordinance also does not address barking dogs.
Although our Noise Ordinance addresses barking dogs, the Animal Control Ordinance should be
amended to reflect and address this issue. Furthermore, the Town's Animal Control Ordinance
also does not address the feeding of feral or wild animals on private property. This can be a
health and safety issue as it draws nuisance animals to the property and impacts neighbors. The
Page 3 of 6
Animal Control Ordinance should be amended to reflect and address this issue. The Town's
Animal Control Ordinance also needs to be updated regarding bee keeping and livestock
keeping, to reflect current issues that have been brought to the Town's attention by affected
residents.
8. Appeal Process Ordinance
Based upon the number of recent appeals, the Planning Commission and Town Council
should review and analyze and potentially amend the appeals process. The Code changes could
implement administrative processes and procedures that clarify who may file, the issues to be
determined by Council on appeal, and the issues to be determined by Planning Commission if
remanded back to the Planning Commission.
9. Short Term Rental Ordinance
The Town currently does not have any regulations for short term vacation rental properties.
Since the Town does not have any regulations, it has prohibited the rental of property for less
than 30 days. The Town needs to study and analyze the impacts of short term vacation rentals on
residential neighborhoods, the overall cost and availability of housing in the Town, and the
revenue that could generated by short term vacation rentals. After studying the issue and
receiving input from the public, the Council would determine whether to allow or prohibit short
term vacation rentals. If allowed, staff would draft regulations that define Vacation Rentals as
distinct from other rental types, make clear where Vacation Rentals may be allowed, limit the
number of Vacation Rentals in neighborhoods where they may be allowed, establish
application/licensing requirements and operating standards for Vacation Rentals, and define and
establish operating standards for Home Stays in all residential districts. If they are to be
prohibited, then language should be adopted into the Town Code specifically prohibiting short
term vacation rentals. This was one of the revenue generating ideas that received at least three
votes of the Town Council in 2015.
10. Public Nuisance Ordinance/Administrative Abatement Hearing
The Town does not have a comprehensive Public Nuisance Ordinance related to the
identification, definition, and enforcement of nuisances. Such an Ordinance would make
identification of violations easier for residents and businesses to understand and thereby comply
with, as well as to assist the Town in enforcing the Code and providing due process. The
Nuisance Ordinance would provide a just, equitable, and practicable method for preventing,
discouraging, and/or abating certain conditions which endanger the life, limb, health, property,
safety, or welfare of the general public. Currently, the Administrative Abatement of Violations
of our Town Code is antiquated and needs to be updated to allow for the enforcement of Code
violations through administrative hearings effectively applied and administered in a fair,
expedient, and cost-efficient manner.
Page 4 of 6
11. Claims/Settlement Authority Ordinance
The Town's current claims ordinance has not been updated since 2003. With the passage of
time, certain provisions have become outdated and other provisions have not historically been
followed. This proposed update would conform the Ordinance to current practice, and update
current settlement limits to allow for more expeditious settlement of claims and disposition of
workers compensation claims.
12. Weed Abatement Ordinance
The Town's Weed Abatement Ordinance was adopted in 1968 and establishes a program and
procedure to maintain weeds in an effort to eliminate hazardous conditions. The Town should
update the Ordinance to expand the definition of weeds to include other dead vegetation, fallen
limbs, and combustible trash on this parcel and add additional language to clarify and strengthen
the Town's weed abatement program. Additionally, ordinance amendments would assist property
owners to understand their responsibilities in property maintenance.
13. Special Event Permits Ordinance
The Town's Special Event Permits Ordinance was adopted in 1992 and needs to be revised to
streamline the process and provide the authority to approve such events within the Town
Managers discretion as opposed to the Police Chief.
14. Drone Ordinance
The Town does not have a Drone Ordinance. The issue of drones and Radio Controlled (RC)
aircraft, otherwise referred to as unmanned aerial systems (UAS) is a growing concern for towns
and cities with multiple incidents of interference with firefighting, other aircraft, and accidents.
Towns/cities are attempting to address the dramatic increase in recreational UAS with various
types of regulations and are beginning to enact regulations that supplement and/or codify federal
law. The major challenge in drafting these ordinances is the federal pre-emption of this issue but
a drone ordinance could regulate the following issues for the Town: 1) Protection of persons and
property in the jurisdiction; 2) Aviation safety, including a specific prohibition against careless
and reckless operations that endanger life or property; 3) Designated take -off and landing zones
for UAS within the Town limits; 4) Identification of critical infrastructure within the Town
limits, or immediately adjacent to its boundaries, with appropriate rules for operation of UAS in
proximity to that infrastructure; and 5) Permissible hours of operation.
15. Noise Ordinance
The Town's Noise Ordinance was adopted in 1991. With the changes to the Town's
Entertainment Policy, the Town needs to analyze and determine whether the noise levels set
forth in the Noise Ordinance adequately protect the residents of Los Gatos from unnecessary,
excessive, and disturbing noise and vibration.
Page 5 of 6
16. Motor Vehicle and Traffic Ordinance
In the course of defending a traffic ticket appeal, it was revealed that there are some necessary
changes to Motor Vehicles and Traffic section of the Code, Chapter 15. Specifically, Chapter 15
was adopted in 1968 and requires the Chief of Police to approve any street sign before obedience
to same can be required. This section controverts the common sense requirement that street sign
approval is the province of the Town Engineer; however it gives credence to challenges by
litigious individuals. The rest of this Code section would also be reviewed for other needed
changes.
Page 6 of 6
Draft Amendments to Chapter 29 of Town Code — Hillside Fences
**Note: Underlined text is new language.
Sec. 29.40.030. Fences, walls, gates, gateways, entry arbors, and hedges.
Sec. 29.40.030xx. — Purpose and intent.
VISION STATEMENT: The overriding goal of this ordinance is that fences farther than 30 feet from
hillside primary dwelling units, shall be animal friendly by not interfering with animal movement. The
proper use of fences in hillside areas can help us live in harmony with native wildlife. On the other
hand, fencing in hillside areas of Town is very different, in both intent and environmental
considerations, then fencing in the Town's other residential areas. For this reason, the Fence Ordinance
is divided into 2 parts: non -hillsides and hillside areas. Fencing in the hillsides can help keep wildlife
away from building envelopes and off the roads. Proper fencing can provide safe and efficient crossing
to wilderness areas that serve as more appropriate food and water sources. For the Los Gatos hillsides,
providing connectivity helps create sustainable habitat for wildlife.
Sec. 29.40.030xx. — Definitions.
The following words, terms, and phrases, when used in this division, shall have the meanings ascribed to
them in this section.
Fence means a man-made structure serving as a barrier or screen constructed of wood, metal, wire,
masonry, glass, plastic, stone or any material.
Fence height means measured from finished grade and shall be measured from either side of the
property line which affords affected property owners the most bufferingfrom noise, light, glare, or
privacy impacts.
Hedge means a boundary formed by closely growing deciduous or evergreen bushes or shrubs.
Hillside lot means a parcel of land that is shown on the Hillside Area Map in the Hillside Development
Standards and Guidelines regardless of zoning district.
Movement corridor means a movement pathway that is typically independent of season and used by
animals on a near daily basis for the acquisition of food, shelter, water, and mates.
Open -view design means a fence or other structure that permits views through it.
Planting Zone 1 means that area within a 30-foot radius of the primary dwelling unit on a hillside lot.
Retaining wall means a man-made structure designed to retain soil.
Riparian corridor means an area comprised of habitat strongly influenced and delineated by the
presence of perennial or intermittent streams.
Stream means a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel
having banks. The body of water may include watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that
supports or has supported riparian vegetation, fish, or aquatic life.
Top of bank means a stream boundary where a majority of normal discharges and channel forming
activities take place. The'top of bank will contain the active channel, active floodplain, and their
associated banks. Where there are no distinguishable features to locate the top of bank, the local
permitting agency will make a determination and document as appropriate. In the absence of this
determination, the 100-year water surface will be used.
Page 1 of 5
EXHIBIT 4
Draft Amendments to Chapter 29 of Town Code — Hillside Fences
Traffic view area means that area, on corner Tots, which is within fifteen (15) feet of a public street and
within two hundred (200) feet of the right-of-way line of an intersection, or a distance of thirty (30) feet
measured horizontally in any direction from the point of intersection of the property lines at street
corners.
Wall means a man-made structure that defines an area, carries a Toad, or provides shelter or security.
Wildlife friendly design means a fence, wall, hedge, or other structure that permits any animal,
regardless of size, to easily climb under, pass through, or lump over.
Sec. 29.40.030xx. — Non -hillside Tots: Proposed new fences, walls, gates, gateways, entry arbors, and
hedges.
(A) In residential zones, no permits are required for the repair, replacement, or construction of
fences, walls, gates, gateways, entry arbors, or hedges that are less than six (6) feet high on, or
within all property lines.
(B) The following height exceptions shall apply:
(1) Corner lot: In a traffic view area, no corner lot or premises in the Town shall have any fence,
wall, gate, gateway, entry arbor, or hedge higher than three (3) feet above the curb unless
permission is secured from the Town Engineer.
(2) Properties not on a street corner: At the discretion of the Director of Community
Development, side yard and rear yard fences, walls, gate, gateways, entry arbors, or hedges,
behind the front yard setback, may be a maximum of eight (8) feet high provided the
property owner can provide written justification to the Planning Department that
demonstrates either of the following conditions exists:
a. A special privacy concern exists that cannot be practically addressed by additional
landscaping or tree screening.
b. A special wildlife/animal problem affects the property that cannot be practically
addressed through alternatives. Documented instances of wildlife grazing on
gardens or ornamental landscaping may be an example of such a problem.
Historic Districts and/or Landmark and Historic Preservation Overlay: The maximum height
of fences in the front yard shall be three (3) feet and shall be of open -view design.
(4) Gateways or entryway arbors: May be up to eight (8) feet high, including within Historic
Districts or for properties with a Landmark and Historic Preservation Overlay, and shall be of
open -view design. A gateway or entryway arbor shall have a maximum width of six (6) feet
and a maximum depth of four (4) feet. No more than one (1) gateway or entryway arbor
per street frontage is allowed.
Adjacent to commercial property: Boundary line fences or walls adjacent to commercial
property may be eight (8) feet high if requested or agreed upon by a majority of the
adjacent residential property owners.
(C) Materials. The type of fencing materials within the non -hillside zone are generally unrestricted,
and fences can be a combination of materials, with the following exceptions:
(1) Plastic fencing is discouraged everywhere and is prohibited in Historic Districts.
(2) Barbed wire or razor ribbon wire is prohibited in all zones.
(3)
(5)
Page 2 of 5
Approvals: Minor Residential Development approval is required pursuant to Section
29.20.480(2)(h). The permit shall be posted on site during construction.
(2) Accessory structures. Fences associated with accessory structures, if located farther than 30
feet from the primary dwelling unit, shall be governed by this section.
Wildlife friendly. All fences, walls, gates, and hedges shall be of wildlife -friendly design. If a
new hillside fence is, in part, closer than 30 feet to the primary dwelling unit and, elsewhere,
farther than 30 feet from the primary dwelling unit, the portion that is farther than 30 feet
shall be of wildlife -friendly design.
(4) Maximum height:
a. New fences. The maximum height of new fences shall be 42 inches.
b. Hedges. Hedges shall be maintained at a maximum height of 60 inches (5 feet).
c. Hedges shall have two- to four -foot -wide gaps at least every 25 feet.
(5) Minimum height above grade:
a. New Fences. The minimum height above grade of new fences shall be 16 inches.
(6) The following fence types are not of wildlife -friendly design and are therefore prohibited:
a. Chain -link, chicken wire, welded wire, wire mesh, cyclone or similar fence material
b. Buck and rail fences.
c. Any fence with bare lengths of wire stretched between posts.
d. Electric fences, including any fence designed to produce an electric shock, except
where necessary for animal husbandry operations.
e. Barbed or razor wire fences, including_any fence with attached barbs, sharp points,
or razors.
(7) Fence design.
a. Fences shall be of an open -view design that does not detract from the scenic nature
or character of the surrounding area.
Draft Amendments to Chapter 29 of Town Code — Hillside Fences
Sec. 29.40.030xx. — Hillside lots: Proposed new fences, walls, gates, gateways, entry arbors, and
hedges.
This division section covers any new fence, wall, gate, gateway, entry arbor, or hedge, and the
replacement, modification, and/or repair of any existing fence, wall, gate, gateway, entry arbor, or
hedge whether the primary dwelling unit is new or existing. In the absence of a primary dwelling unit,
an entire hillside lot, including any accessory structures such as a barn, storage shed, stable, or similar
structure, shall be covered by the conditions of this Section.
(A) Within 30 feet of primary dwelling unit (Planting Zone 1):
(1) Approvals: Minor Residential Development approval is required pursuant to Section
29.20.480(2)(h). The permit shall be posted on site during construction.
(2) Are subject to the provisions of Sec. 29.40.030, Non -hillside residential lots above.
(3) Riparian corridor. No fence, wall, gate or hedge shall be constructed within a riparian
corridor or within 30 feet of its top of bank.
(4) Prohibited materials. Barbed or razor wire fences, including any fence with attached barbs,
sharp points, or razors, are prohibited.
(B) Greater than 30 feet from primary dwelling unit (outside Planting Zone 1):
(1)
(3)
Page 3 of 5
Draft Amendments to Chapter 29 of Town Code — Hillside Fences
b. Traditional split -rail fences are encouraged. Rural styles shall emphasize natural
colors such as brown, grey or green.
c. Fences shall have a top level of wood (or similar material) rail rather than wire.
d. Split rail fences shall include a minimum 12-inch spacing between rails wherever
feasible.
e. Hedge plant species shall consist of those listed in Appendix A of the Hillside
Development Standards and Guidelines.
f. The spacing of vertical fence posts shall be at least 10 feet apart, unless physically
impossible due to terrain or other conditions.
(8) Fence, wall, gate, and hedge siting:
a. Fences and hedges shall be located to follow natural contours, whenever possible.
b. Fences and hedges shall be located to avoid impacts to trees, animal movement
corridors, and other natural features.
c. No fence, wall, gate or hedge shall be constructed within a riparian corridor, stream,
or within 30 feet of its top of bank.
d. No fence, wall, gate, or hedge shall be constructed in the public or private right-of-
way or within any trail easement or other easement precluding their construction
unless allowed, in writing, by the Town Engineer.
(9) Walls:
a. Walls are prohibited unless needed for privacy as determined by the Director of
Community Development.
b. Town approved retaining walls are permitted.
(C) Replacement or modification of existing fences, walls, hedges or gates:
(1) Shall be subject to the requirements in this Ordinance. The permit will be posted on site
during construction.
(2) Are encouraged if such changes improve wildlife movement or animal corridors.
(3) Replacement or modification of any fence, wall, hedge or gate shall be prohibited if the
Town Engineer determines that a public safety hazard exists.
(D) Repair. A permit is not required for repair to sections of existing fences, walls, or hedges less
than 50 feet in length and/or no greater than 25 percent of total fence, wall, or hedu length,
provided no other repair work is done on the same structure over a 12- month eriod.
(E) Exceptions:
(1)
Fences around swimming pools, outdoor sports courts, and similar structures are not
required to be of wildlife -friendly design, even if farther than 30 feet from the primary
dwelling unit (see Sec. 29.10.09020 for other swimming pool requirements). Sport court
fencing may be 12 feet in height.
(2) A temporary (1 to 3 year), animal excluding, circular enclosing fence may be erected to
protect a newly planted tree or shrub.
Fences needed for livestock control do not have to be of wildlife -friendly design even if
farther than 30 feet from the primary dwelling unit.
(3)
Page 4 of 5
Draft Amendments to Chapter 29 of Town Code — Hillside Fences
(4) Written exceptions may be granted when the Director of Community Development finds
that the strict application of these requirements will result in a hardship for the property
owner.
(F) Fees. The fee, as adopted by Town Resolution for Minor Residential development, prescribed
therefore in the municipal fee schedule, shall accompany any application for a fence in the
Hillside area submitted to the Town for review and evaluation pursuant to this division.
(G) Enforcement. Any fence, wall, gate, gateway, entry arbor, or hedge constructed, replaced,
modified, or repaired without required approval, is a violation of this Code.
(H) Where a conflict exists between the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) ofa
hillside Planned Development (PD) and this document, the requirements of this document shall
prevail.
(I) Notices. Noticing shall comply with the public noticing procedures of section 29.20,480 of the
Town Code.
(Ord. No.1316, § 4.10.020, 6-7-76; Ord. No. 1493, 3-17-81; Ord. No. 1873, § 1, 10-7-91; Ord. No. 2049, §
I, 10-5-98; Ord. No. 2062, § I, 6-21-99; Ord. No. XXXX, § )
Page 5 of 5
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
General Plan Policies and Actions Pertaining to Fences, Wildlife Habitats, and Migration Corridors
Element
Page
Theme
Under Goal
Title
Text
Land Use
LU-21
Wildlife Habitats
Policy LU-1.3
To preserve existing trees, natural vegetation, natural topography, riparian corridors and wildlife habitats, and promote high quality, well -designed, environmentally
sensitive, and diverse landscaping in new and existing developments.
Land Use
LU-19
Conservation of
Natural
Environment
Hillside Specific
Plan
Hillside Specific Plan The Hillside Specific Plan establishes land use policy for the Hillside Study Area, an area of mountainous terrain in the southeastern portion of
the Town designated for Hillside Residential development. Adopted by Town Council in 1978, the Specific Plan establishes a series of policies and standards related
to land use, facilities, services, circulation, fire protection, safety, and open space. These policies and standards are intended to prevent deficiencies in access to
water and sewer services, ensure conservation of the sensitive natural environment, and address differences in Town and County land use regulations.
Community Design
CD-5
Fencing
Goal CD-3: To require utilities, landscaping
and streetscapes to contribute to Los Gatos's
high -quality character,
Policy CD-3.8
Solid fencing over 3 feet high shall be designed such that it does not Isolate the structures from the street, or shall be set back and landscaped.
Community Design
CD-23
Fencing
Goal CD-15 To preserve the natural
topography and ecosystems within the hillside
area by regulating grading, landscaping, and
lighting.
Policy CO.15,6
Fences shall be of open design unless required for privacy. A minimal amount of land shall be enclosed by fences over five feet high.
Community Design
CD-23
Wildlife Habitats
Goal CD-15 To preserve the natural
topography and ecosystems within the hillside
area by regulating grading, landscaping, and
lighting.
Policy CD-15.4
Hillside tandscaping shall be designed with the following goals In mind:
a. Minimizing formal landscaping and hardscape.
b, Siting formal landscaping and hardscape close to the house.
c. Following the natural topography.
d. Preserving native trees, native plant and wildlife habitats, and migration corridors.
Community Design
CD-23
Wildlife Habitats
Goal CD-15 To preserve the natural
topography and ecosystems within the hillside
area by regulating grading, landscaping, and
lighting.
Policy CD-15.5
Review all development proposals to ensure appropriate grading and landscaping and minimal disruption of existing native plants and wildlife habitat.
Community Design
CD-28
Wildlife Habitats
Goal CD-17 To conduct careful review of new
projects and provide dear direction to
property owners, neighbors, and potential
developers.
Action CD-17.6
Adopt guidelines for development review that protect:
a. Rare plants and wildlife and their habitats.
b. Natural watersheds.
c. Historic sites.
d. Aesthetically significant sites.
Community Design
CD-6
Wildlife Habitats
Goal CD-4 To preserve existing trees, natural
vegetation, natural topography, riparian
corridors and wildlife habitats, and promote
high quality, well designed, environmentally
sensitive, and diverse landscaping in new and
existing developments.
Policy CD-4.1
Preserve the Town's distinctive and unique environment by preserving and maintaining the natural topography, wildlife, and native vegetation, and by mitigating
and reversing the harmful effects of traffic congestion, pollution, and environmental degradation on the Town's urban landscape.
Community Design
CD-8
Wildlife Habitats
Goal CD-6 To promote and protect the
physical and other distinctive qualities of
residential neighborhoods.
Policy CD-6.4
New hornes shall be sited to maximize privacy, livability, protection of natural plant and wildlife habitats and migration corridors, and adequate solar access and
wind conditions. Siting should take advantage of scenic views but should not create significant ecological or visual impacts affecting open spaces, public places, or
other properties.
Community Design
CD-21
Wildlife Habitats
Goal CD-14 To preserve the natural beauty
and ecological integrity of the Santa Cruz
Mountains and surrounding hillsides by
regulating new homes.
Policy CD-14.1
Minimize development and preserve and enhance the rural atmosphere and natural plant and wildlife habitats in the hillsides.
Community Design
CD-22
Wildlife Habitats
Goal CD-14 To preserve the natural beauty
and ecological integrity of the Santa Cruz
Mountains and surrounding hillsides by
regulating new homes.
Policy CD-14.5
Staff shall require adequate environmental analysis for projects in the hillside area to ensure appropriate censideratlon of potential environmental impacts
associated with projects.
Community Design
CD-22
Wildlife Habitats
Goal Co-14 To preserve the natural beauty
and ecological integrity of the Santa Cruz
Mountains and surrounding hillsides by
regulating new homes.
Policy CD-14.6
Preserve and protect the natural state of the Santa Cruz Mountains and surrounding hillsides by discouraging inappropriate development on and near the hillsides
that significantly impacts wewsheds.
Community Design
CD-22
Wildlife Habitats
Goal CD-15 To preserve the natural
topography and ecosystems within the hillside
area by regulating grading, landscaping, and
lighting.
Opens Space, Park, and
Recreation
OSP-11
Wildlife Habitats/
Migration
Corridors
Goal OSP-2 To preserve open space in hillside
areas as natural open space.
Policy OSP-2.1
Preserve the natural open space character of hillside lands, including natural topography, natural vegetation, wildlife habitats and migration corridors, and
vlewsheds.
-1
44.
Page 1 of 2
1' 4
General Plan Policies and Actions Pertaining to Fences, Wildlife Habitats, and Migration Corridors
Opens Space, Park, and
Recreation
OSP-11
Wildlife Habitats/
Migration
Corridors
Goal OSP-2 To preserve open space in hillside
areas as natural open space.
Policy OSP-2.4
Adjacent parcels In the hillsides shall provide an uninterrupted band of useable segments for wildlife corridors and recreational use, If applicable.
Opens Space, Park, and
Recreation
OSP-16
Wildlife Habitats/
Migration
Corridors
Goal OSP-6 To consider the provision of open
space in all development decisions within the
Town.
Policy OSP-6.3
Consider effects on watershed areas, plant and wildlife habitats, and migration corridors before allowing development of any open space.
Environment and
Sustainability
ENV-13
Wildlife Habitats
Goal ENV-4 To conserve wildlife populatons.
Policy ENV-4.1
'Public and private pro{ects shall not significantly deplete, damage or alter existing wildlife habitat or populations.
Environment and
Sustainability
ENV-13
Wildlife Habitats/
Migration
Corridors
Goal ENV-4 To conserve wildlife populations.
Policy ENV-4.3
Maintain open space and native plant communities that provide habitat and migration corridors for native wildlife species.
Environment and
Sustainability
ENV-13
Wildi}fe Habitats/
Migration
Corridors
Goal ENV-4 To conserve wildlife populations.
Policy ENV-4.4
Identify and protect areas with significant habitat diversity or importance for wildlife, such as riparian corridors, wildlife movement corridors and large tracts of
undeveloped land,
Environment and
Sustainability .
ENV-14
Wildlife Habitats/
Migration
Corridors
Goal ENV•4 To conserve wildlife populations.
Policy ENV-4.11 .
Town staff shall review site plans to ensure that existing significant wildlife habitats and migration corridors are not adversely affected by either individual or
cumulative development impacts.
Environment and
Sustainability
ENV.,14
Wildlife Habitats/
Migration
Corridors
Goal ENV-4 To conserve wildlife populations.
Action ENV-4.1
Develop a Migration Corridor Plan for hillside areas in Los Gatos.
Page 2 of 2
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines Pertaining to Fences, Wildlife Habitats, and Migration Corridors
ChaiDter Section
Title
DesalpHon
6.A
Site Elements
Fences and Wails
• The objective of the following standards and guidelines is to limit six-foot high fences and walls and deer fencing to those areas where they are absolutely necessary. It is recognized that fencing around limited landscaped areas is
sometimes necessary for security and to provide yard areas for and to protect children and pets. However, the cumulative impact of six-foot high chain link fences and solid fences and walls surrounding hillside properties has a significant
impact on the movement pattern of wildlife and on the open rural character of the hillsides.
Pic: Rural character allows wildlife to pass through.
Standards:
1. The use of fences and walls shall be minimized and located so that natural landforms appear to flow together and are not disconnected. The primary emphasis shall be on maintaining open views, protecting wildlife -corridors, and
maintaining the rural, open, and natural character of the hillsides.
2. Fences and walls shall not exceed a height of six feet measured from the highest side of the fence or wall and should be limited to those areas where fences and walls of this height are necessary for protection of ornamental landscaping,
security, or play areas.
3. Solid fencing materials shall not be used unless needed for privacy.
4. Deer fencing up to a maximum height of eight feet shall be limited to areas around ornamental landscaping. Larger areas shall not be enclosed unless specific reasons for keeping deer out have been demonstrated to the satisfaction of
the decision making body.
5. Fences shall not be allowed in areas that would impede the movement of wildlife as determined by the decision making body.
6. Temporary construction fencing shall be limited to the building envelope or shall be elevated to allow for movement of small animals.
Guidelines:
1, Wood rail -type fences and gates are preferred.
2. Chain link fences are strongly discouraged.
3. Chain link fencing should be coated with green, brown, or black vinyl or finish and shall be supported by a wood frame. Dark, painted metal poles may be required if deemed appropriate by the decision making body.
4. Only open fencing should be located within 20 feet of a property line adjacent to a street.
5. Fences should follow the topography.
6.8
Site Elements
Driveway Entries
Standards:
1. Entryways shall be designed to blend with the natural environment and to maintain the rural character of the hillsides.
2. Entry gates shall be set back from the edge of the adjacent street a minimum of 25 feet. A greater setback may be required when a gated entrance serves more than one house.
3. Lighting fixtures at entryways shall direct light downwards and shall be designed so that no part of the light source is visible from the street.
4. The property address shall be clearly displayed so that it is visible from the street at each dnveway.
5. Entry gates equipped with locking devices or electronic control switches shall be approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department.
Guidelines:
1. Entryway gates and fencing should be of an open design.
2. Entry gates that are monumental are strongly discouraged.
6 C
site Elements
Retaining Walls
Standards:
1. Retaining walls shall not be used to create large, flat yard areas. The limited use of retaining walls may be allowed when it can be demonstrated that their use will substantially reduce the amount of grading.
2. Retaining walls that are visible from a public street shall have a veneer of natural stone, stained concrete, or textured surface to help blend the wall with the natural hillside environment and to promote a rural character.
Guidelines:
1. Retaining walls should not be higher than five feet. Where an additional retained portion is necessary due to unusual or extreme conditions (e.g., lot configuration, steep slope, or road design), the use of multiple -terraced, lower
retaining structures is preferred.
2. Terraced retaining walls should be separated by at least three feet and include appropriate landscaping.
3. Retaining and planter walls should be provided with a landscaped setback or buffer of at least five feet adjacent to the street.
4. Retaining walls should blend with the natural topography, follow existing contours, and be curvilinear to the greatest extent possible. Retaining walls should not run in a straight continuous direction for more than 50 feet without a
break, offset, or planting pocket to break up the long flat horizontal surface.
5. Landscaping should be provided adjacent to retaining wails and should include a combination of native trees and shrubs to screen the wall.
6. Retaining walls should be constructed of permanent materials (stone, concrete, masonry block/brick) rather than wood.
Page 1 of 1
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
TOWN OF Los GATOS
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
VI. SITE ELEMENTS
A. Fences and wads.
The objective of the following standards and guidelines is to limit six-foot high fences and
walls and deer fencing to those areas where they are absolutely necessary. It is recognized
that fencing around limited landscaped areas is sometimes necessary for security and to
provide yard areas for and to protect children and pets. However, the cumulative impact of
six-foot high chain link fences and solid fences and walls surrounding hillside properties has
a significant impact on the movement pattern of wildlife and on the open rural character of
the hillsides.
Rural character allows wildlife to pass through.
Do this
Standards:
Urban character
Don't do this
1. The use of fences and walls shall be minimized and located so that natural landforms
appear to flow together and are not disconnected. The primary emphasis shall be on
maintaining open views, protecting wildlife corridors, and maintaining the rural, open,
and natural character of the hillsides.
2. Fences and walls shall not exceed a height of six feet measured from the highest side of
the fence or wall and should be limited to those areas where fences and walls of this
height are necessary for protection of ornamental landscaping, security, or play areas.
3. Solid fencing materials shall not be used unless needed for privacy.
Page 42
TOWN OF Los GATOS
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
4. Deer fencing up to a maximum height of eight feet shall be limited to areas around
ornamental landscaping. Larger areas shall not be enclosed unless specific reasons for
keeping deer out have been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the decision making
body.
5. Fences shall not be allowed in areas that would impede the movement of wildlife as
determined by the decision making body.
6. Temporary construction fencing shall be limited to the building envelope or shall be
elevated to allow for movement of small animals.
Guidelines:
1. Wood rail -type fences and gates are preferred.
2. Chain link fences are strongly discouraged,
3. Chain link fencing should be coated with green, brown, or black vinyl or finish and shall
be supported by a wood frame. Dark, painted metal poles may be required if deemed
appropriate by the decision making body.
4. Only open fencing should be located within 20 feet of a property line adjacent to a
street.
5. Fences should follow the topography.
B. Driveway entries.
Standards:
1. Entryways shall be designed to blend with the natural environment and to maintain the
rural character of the hillsides.
2. Entry gates shall be set back from the edge of the adjacent street a minimum of 25 feet.
A greater setback may be required when a gated entrance serves more than one house.
3. Lighting fixtures at entryways shall direct light downwards and shall be designed so that
no part of the Tight source is visible from the street.
Page 43
TOWN OF Los GATOS
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
Wood fences and gates are encouraged
Do this
r
Monumental entry gates are strongly discouraged
Don't do this
4. The property address shall be clearly displayed so that it is visible from the street at
each driveway.
5. Entry gates equipped with locking devices or electronic control switches shall be
approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department.
Guidelines:
1. Entryway gates and fencing should be of an open design.
2. Entry gates that are monumental are strongly discouraged.
Page 44
TOWN OF Los GATOS
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
C. Retaining walls.
Standards:
1. Retaining walls shall not be used to create large, flat yard areas. The limited use of
retaining walls may be allowed when it can be demonstrated that their use will
substantially reduce the amount of grading.
2. Retaining walls that are visible from a public street shall have a veneer of natural stone,
stained concrete, or textured surface to help blend the wall with the natural hillside
environment and to promote a rural character.
Retaining walls blend with the natural topography
Guidelines:
1. Retaining walls should not be higher than five feet. Where an additional retained
portion is necessary due to unusual or extreme conditions (e.g., lot configuration, steep
slope, or road design), the use of multiple -terraced, lower retaining structures is
preferred.
2. Terraced retaining walls should be separated by at least three feet and include
appropriate landscaping.
3. Retaining and planter walls should be provided with a landscaped setback or buffer of at
least five feet adjacent to the street.
Page 45
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
Don't do this
Do this
4. Retaining walls should blend with the natural topography, follow existing contours, and
be curvilinear to the greatest extent possible. Retaining walls should not run in a
straight continuous direction for more than 50 feet without a break, offset, or planting
pocket to break up the long flat horizontal surface.
5. Landscaping should be provided adjacent to retaining walls and should include a
combination of native trees and shrubs to screen the wall.
Landscaping used to screen and soften tall retaining wall
Page 46
TOWN OF Los GATOS
HILLSIDE (DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
4. Retaining walls should be constructed of permanent materials (stone, concrete, masonry
block/brick) rather than wood.
Retaining walls maintain rural character
D. Outdoor lighting.
Standards:
Retaining walls maintain rural character
1. Outdoor lighting shall comply with the Town of Los Gatos Zoning
Ordinance.
2. Lighting shall be the minimum needed for pedestrian safety, and shall be
low level, directed downward, and shielded so that no bulb is visible and
glare encroaches onto neighboring properties.
4. Unshaded or nonrecessed spotlights are prohibited.
5. Lighting for purely decorative purposes is
prohibited. Up -lighting of trees, lighting of
facades and architectural features is prohibited.
6. Lighting for night use of outdoor game courts
(e.g., tennis, paddle tennis, basketball, etc.) is
prohibited.
Inappropriate
lighting fixture
Refer to the
Town's
Zoning
Ordinance
no Tight or
Page 47
Sean Mullin
From: David Klinger <dave.klinger@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 10:44 AM
To: Sean Mullin
Subject: Fence Heights
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
City of Los Gatos,
I am in the process of obtaining a fence height waiver from the Director of Community Development to replace an existing
worn fence, sections of which are at six feet high, others at seven feet including a 1 foot lattice on top. I have obtained the
approval of all adjacent neighbors and paid the $233 waiver fee. I purchased the house two years ago, and was not
advised at that time that the fence was non -compliant with city regulations.
I notice many of my neighbors in surrounding blocks have similar seven foot high fences. These seven foot fences are
apparently very common. None of the neighbors I spoke with appear to have obtained a waiver or have a permit and
would be required to pay the $233 waiver application fee in order to become compliant with city regulations. I believe,
without any proof, most of these neighbors would simply replace their seven foot fences without obtaining a permit when
their old fence degrades. It would appear, again without proof, that it's wink, wink, nod, nod on code enforcement, or that
the policy of the city is to enforce only when there is a complaint. City residents who wish to be compliant pay the fee,
those who don't know the regulations or don't wish to pay the fee remain noncompliant. This doesn't seem fair.
Los Gatos should amend the fence ordinance to allow, without permit or waiver, replacement or new construction of
privacy fences that allow six foot plus one foot of lattice fence heights, if all of their adjacent neighbors agree. If
disagreements arose, the burden of proof would be on the owner to show that they have the approval of their immediate
neighbors.
David Klinger
141 Potomac Dr
Los Gatos, CA 95032
i
Sean Mullin
From: Pam Bond <pamabond@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 3:32 PM
To: Sean Mullin
Subject: Re: THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS IS SEEKING PUBLIC INPUT ON PROPOSED TOWN CODE
AMENDMENTS REGARDING FENCES, HEDGES, AND WALLS.
Hi Sean,
I read the proposed code amendments. Our property is in the hillside zoning and so we did see some of the
requirements when we were building our house. So I am somewhat familiar with the wording, etc.
My concerns with these proposed changed to hillside residences are that a 42" fence height is not great for
people with kids. I know that the goal is to let wildlife pass through but this could be pretty scary for kids to
encounter a coyote or basically any wildlife that can jump a 42" fence. We are always out with our kids and can
generally see them but I would be nervous to have a shorter fence and feel comfortable letting the kids run
around. The hedging option only partially solves this since there would still be periodic gaps.
Also, anyone with dogs will need to figure out what to do about their dogs if they want them to run around. I
don't think 42" will keep larger dogs inside their property. I guess they'd need a dog run and I'm not sure how
people will feel. We don't have a dog but I have been thankful on walks when we walk past a property with a
dog and find a much higher fence (I'd assume maybe 5' for safety?).
I would imagine people would have concerns for security and safety with a 42" fence limit too. Much easier to
just hope over and rob a place, I'd imagine.
We still get bobcats and foxes and smaller animals with our metal 6' fence. They can slip under or if they
manage to dig a little, can get in as well. We had a coyote problem where the neighbor's chickens were being
poached by a coyote and brought to our yard to eat them. We can keep the coyotes out when we plug holes
under fences, and I'd prefer to keep it that way for our kids' safety.
If we let the deer in, there would be more limitations to what we could grow with our grey water irrigation
system. We have mostly natives but even the natives are not deer proof. I would imagine people will have
issues with more limited landscaping plants due to deer. I think we could adapt if our fence ever falls
down. But I am not sure others would.
My main concerns are safety with the fencing height limit. Safety as relates to kids (keeping them in and
keeping them safe), aggressive dogs (keeping them from jumping fences), and property safety (keeping
criminals out). I do care about wildlife corridors and I am concerned that residential encroachment will harm
wildlife movement and health. 1 think there may be another solution. Wildlife corridors are great. Fencing
setbacks on property are great.
Thanks,
Pamela Bond
17140 Mill Rise Way
Los Gatos, CA 95030
650-793-3844 cell
1
On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 1 1 :24 AM, Pam Bond <parnabond(a,gmait.com> wrote:
Hi,
It would be helpful to be able to see what the amendment actually is - what changes have been proposed. 1 can't
tell from the document what is new or changed. It is a lot of text for people to read without knowing what has
changed. I would be interested to be involved in submitting my input for such things.
Thanks
Pam Bond
650-793-3844 cell
Sean Mullin
From: Christopher Kankel <ckankel@kkdesigngroup.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 2:59 PM
To: Sean Mullin
Subject: Re: Town of Los Gatos seeking public input - Hillside Fence Ordinance
Attachments: LG fence ordinance revision.pages.pdf
Hello Sean,
Thank you for reaching out to residents and professionals and for the opportunity to provide feedback. I've
attached a letter below with some comments and suggestions. Feel free to call me with any questions.
Thank you,
Chris
Christopher Kankel
Kikuchi + Kankel Design Group
Landscape Architecture
Site Planning
Environmental Design
www.kkdesicingroup.com
(408) 356-5980
July 18, 2017
Sean Mullin
Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
RE: Proposed changes to Los Gatos fencing ordinance
Dear Sean,
pi&
Kikuchi + Kankel
Design Group
Landscape Archirecrcrre
Environmenrol Design
Sire Planning
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback regarding the proposed changes to the Town of Los Gatos fencing ordinance. 1 have reviewed
the proposed ordinance from the perspective of both a resident and a landscape architect and have several thoughts to share. While I appreciate
the need to accommodate the wildlife whose territory we infringe upon, I also respect the need and right to privacy and security of my clients and
fellow residents, Developing a fencing ordinance that accommodates both the wildlife and residents is a delicate balancing act. My comments
listed below pertain solely to the proposed language regarding Hillside Fencing:
1. The proposed language effectively prevents corrals or any other type of fencing to contain or protect domestic animals when located more
than 30' from the main residence.
2. The proposed language effectively prevents vegetable gardens more than 30' from the main residence.
3. The proposed language effectively prevents a secure automobile gate near the road.
4. The proposed language greatly inhibits flexibility in the installation of security fencing. Per the code, a security fence of sorts may be
allowed within 30 feet of the house, but it will effectively create an arbitrary island of development within a larger property.
As a designer, I would suggest consider an ordinance that allows for a given percentage of a site area to be contained by six fool high secure
fencing (for instance, one-third of the gross property size or a minimum of x square feet). This would allow residents and designers flexibility in
choosing what portions and extents of their property are secure while insuring a greater portion of their property remains accessible to wildlife. It
also allows residents and designers to ability to optimize the more usable portions of their properties. Each hillside properly is vastly different in
character and limiting the six foot high fencing to 30 feet proximate to the main residence is arbitrarily limiting usable space in many cases.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to offer my opinion on the matter.
Regards,
Christopher Kankel
Kikuchi + Kankel Design Group
61 E Main Srreer, Suite C
Los Gotos, CA 95030
(408) 356 5980
Steven 7 Kikuchi, PSLA, Principal
Christopher Kunkel. ASLA, Principal
Warren Domes. Associate
Thornos Conroy, Associate
Robert J Dietz, ASIA, ISA, Associate
RECEIVED
JUL 18 2011
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
730 Mill Srreer. Half Moon 0oy, CA
(650) 726-7100
www kkdesigngraup corn
Original Message --
From: Donnelly, Peter(mailto:Peter.Donnelly@dell.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 9:59 AM
To: Joel Paulson
Cc: Donnelly, Peter
Subject: Proposed changes to hillside fencing standards & guidelines
Joel,
hope all is well. I heard about the proposed changes to the hillside fencing standards & guidelines. I am unfortunately
going to be out of town next week and will not be able to attend the public hearing. That said I did want to share a few
comments for consideration as you work through the final language. While I am in general agreement with what is
being proposed (we love to see the wildlife wandering across our property everyday) I do think there are a few practical
considerations that need to be considered in the language as currently drafted.
- I believe 30' as a hard and fast rule is too restrictive. I think the Town should consider a longer distance of say 50' or
preferably have a two part definition that takes into consideration the remaining space on an individual property i.e
restricted to 30' from primary dwelling unless it can be demonstrated that a minimum X' (say 50' min) wildlife corridor
can be established within the boundaries of the property to allow free passage of wildlife across the property.
- In situations where accessory structures such as pools, patios, BBQ areas are incorporated into a home design the 30'
(or what ever is finalized) should be measured from those items and not simply the primary dwelling unit, In certain
cases these structures may already be > 30' from the primary dwelling and therefore a fence around them would not be
allowed
For large properties a provision should be provided to allow for an entry gate to private driveways (to restrict vehicular
access / improve security, etc. As I read the draft this would not be accommodated
Happy to discuss if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Peter
Anthony J. Badame, MD
73 Mariposa Court
Los Gatos, CA 95030
July 19, 2017
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Attn: Planning Commission
Re: Fence Policy
Dear Commissioners:
The proposed fence policy is a worthwhile endeavor in an effort to preserve the beauty and habitat of
the hillside. I agree with nearly all the language short of two concerns which are as follows:
1. It appears that vegetable gardens greater than 30 feet from the primary dwelling cannot be
enclosed. On the hillside, vegetable gardens are commonly greater than 30 feet from the
primary dwelling. Without an enclosure, wildlife will certainly destroy every vegetable garden
attempted. An additional exception under Sec. 2940.030xx E. to include vegetable gardens
would be beneficial. The following is suggested language:
Fences needed for edible food gardens do not have to be of wildlife -friendly
design even if farther than 30 feet from the primary dwelling unit.
2. The fence repair statements in (D) and (G) combine to generate an element of confusion:
(D) Repair. A permit is not required for repair to sections of existing fences, walls, or hedges
less than 50 feet in length and/or no greater than 25% of total fence, wall, or hedge length,
provided no other repair work is done on the same structure over a 12-month period.
(G) Enforcement. Any fence, wall, gate, gateway, entry arbor, or hedge constructed, replaced.
modified, or repaired without required approval, is a violation of this Code.
1f no permit is required for repair as described in (D), then what approval is required in (G)?
Clarification would be helpful.
Sincerely,
Anthony Badame, MD
RECEIVED
JUL 20 2017
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
From: Tanya Kurland[mailto:ts@vkgmaii.crocodile.org] On Behalf Of Tanya Kurland ?
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 5:55 PM
To: Donnelly, Peter ‹oeter.donneily@emc.com>
Cc: Vadim Kurland <vadim@vk.crocodile.org>
Subject: Town' s proposal wrt fence height
Hi Peter,
I have noticed that town has changed a few things in their proposal since yesterday, but there still
are some things that I believe should be added. I would like to run this by you before I submit
this to the town. Could you please take a look? I wonder if it would be better if you sent the
comments to the town instead of me since they know you so well?
I. I think it is important to list more specific examples of "similar structures" in
Exceptions sections, E (l ). The list clearly states pools and sport courts, but it is unclear what
else might fall under "similar structures". The BBQ, picnic areas and playgrounds should be
added. Deer passing through such areas present danger to the people because they
carry teaks. Stanford research has determined widespread presence of Lyme disease
carrying teaks in Santa Clara county in 2014
http://www.mercurynews.com/201 4/02/ 19/stanford-study-finds-lyme-disease-widespread-in-
bay-area-open-spaces/
Chronic Lyme disease can drastically shorten the life span
http:1 /www. shearnedi cal .coin/the-overlooked%E2 %80%93 and-
deadly%E2%80%93coinplications-of-Lyme-disease-and-its-coinfections
2. I think that the height of the hedges should not be restricted to 5' if they are needed as privacy
screen between neighbors. Such hedges should be made an exception.
3. We should probably think about the gate we have down at the beginning of Suview dr. On the
one hand, this gate is on easement and is maintained by whole community. On the other,
technically it is located on our property and is farther away than 30' from the house. So it may be
considered to fall under the proposed restrictions height -wise. It is probably ok right now since it
has been built before restrictions come into effect, but the proposal says any future replacements
and repairs must comply with new rules so we may have problems if we ever need to rebuild or
replace it.
Thank you,
Tanya
Sean Mullin
From: Tanya Kurland <ts@vkgmail.crocodile.org> on behalf of Tanya Kurland rr
<ts@vk.crocodi le.org>
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 10:36 AM
To: Sean Mullin
Subject: town proposal and danger to public health
Dear Mr. Mullin,
I would like to bring your attention to the facts relating to free wildlife access to hillside properties (as it
intended in a proposal to amend Town Code Section 29.40.030 (Fences, hedges, and walls)) and serious danger
it presents for public health.
Stanford researchers say they have found ticks infected with the newer strain, called Borrelia miyamotoi, in
open spaces in Santa Mateo and Santa Clara counties. The study, which was conducted by dragging white
flannel blankets through 12 Bay Area recreational areas, found ticks with the new pathogen, but also ticks
carrying Borrelia burgdorferi, the entity known for decades to cause Lyme disease.
http://www. sfgate. com/health/article/Lynne-di sease-more-common-in-Bay-Area-than-5267529. php
Borrelia miyamotoi is a species of spiral -shaped bacteria that is closely related to the bacteria that cause tick -
borne relapsing fever (TBRF). It is more distantly related to the bacteria that cause Lyme disease. The case
series report was prepared by a research team led by Philip J. Molloy, MD about Borrelia
miyamotoi, where authors wrote: "Patients presented with acute headache, fever, and chills ... Patients were
commonly described as appearing 'toxic'; more than 50% were suspected of having sepsis, and 24% required
hospitalization. The headaches were most commonly described as severe, resulting in head computed
tomography scans and spinal taps in 5 patients."
http://www.medscape.comiviewarticle/846337
A lot of people, even some doctors mistakenly think that there is no Lyme disease in California and it goes
undiagnosed and not properly treated. Chronic Lyme disease could severely shorten the life spam.
http://www.sheamedical.comlthe-overlooked%E2%80%093 and-deadly%E2 %80%93 complications-of-lyme-
disease-and-its-coinfections
Both diseases are spread by teaks that shed by deer. The only way to protect people from this terrible diseases
is to limit deer access to hillside properties. I think that proposal should not limit the hight of fences and
hedges, but require residents to provide corridors for wildlife to pass through on their properties instead.
I shall attend a hearing to bring awareness of the diseases related to deer.
Thank you,
Tanya Kurland
i