07-14-15 Minutes - DRCTOWN OF LOS GATOS
110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354-6874
SUMMARY MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVJEW
COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR JULY 14,2015 HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL
CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER, II 0 EAST MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS , CALIFORNIA.
The meeting was called to order at I 0:05 a.m. by Chair Machado.
ATTENDANCE
Members Present:
Marni Moseley, Associate Plann er
Jocelyn Puga , Assistant Planner
Doug Harding, Fire Departm ent
Michael Machado, Building Official
Mark Glendinning, Building Inspector
Ryan Fong, Assistant Civil Engineer
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM 1: 15371 Santella Court (Lot 8)
Architecture and Site Application S-15-001
Requesting approval to construct a new single-family residence on property zo ned
HR-2 Y2:PD. APN 529-09-017.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Davidon Homes
PROJECT PLANNER: Jocelyn Puga
I . Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project. Planner Jocelyn Puga explained part of the visibility
study included a view from the Blossom Hill Road viewing platform.
3. Applicant was introduced.
4. Members of the public were present:
Dr. David Weisman questioned the validity of the visibility study and stated that story poles are
difficult to see due to the tree canopy.
Applicant responded that it is a good thing as the tree canopy will not change and that none of
the trees are deciduous trees so there will always be foliage on the trees . He explained what the
story poles depict and the resultant visibility study.
Dr. David Weisman suggested that there should be a peer-review of the visibility study.
Applicant mentioned that they went above and beyond all the visibility study requirements.
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Ryan Fong moved to approve the application subject to the conditions presented with the
following findings and considerations:
DRC Minutes
July 14 ,2015
Page 2
Required findings for CEQA:
FINDINGS:
• An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the Planned Development and was
certified by the Town Council on December 19,2005. Required technical reviews (arborist,
architect and geotechnical) have been completed for the project and no further environmental
analysis is required for this application.
Compliance with the approved Planned Development :
• The project is in compliance with the approved Planned Development (Ordinance 214 7).
Compliance with Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines:
• An exception to allow fill (HDS&G standard) greater than three feet is supported by the need
to provide a shared driveway that meets Town and Fire Department Standards . Due to the
steep topography of the site, the property is only accessible by the shared driveway between
lots 8 and 9.
• An exception to allow the slope of the driveway to exceed 15 percent (HDS&G standard) is
supported due to the steep topography of the site and shared driveway between lots 8 and 9.
The slope ofthe existing driveway is 23 percent. The slope of the proposed driveway would
be 1 8 percent, thus reducing the amount of grading that would be required in order to achieve
a driveway that has a slope of 15 percent or less. Shared driveways serving more than one lot
are encouraged by the HDS&G.
Compliance with Hillside Specific Plan
• The project is in compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan in that it is a single-family
residence being developed on an existing parcel. The proposed development is consistent
with the development criteria included in the Specific Plan.
CONSIDERATIONS:
Considerations in review of Architecture and Site applications:
• As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an
Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project.
7. Glendinning seconded, motion passed unanimously.
8. Appeal rights were cited.
DRC Minutes
July 14 ,20 15
Page 3
ITEM 2: 17445 Zena Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S-15-038
Requesting approval to construct a 546-square foot golf practice building and a 750-
square foot pump house on property zoned RC. APN 409-31-00 I.
PROPERTY OWNER: Maxine Leider Trust
APPLICANT: La Rinconada Country Club
PROJECT PLANNER: Marni Moseley
1. Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project.
3 . Applicant was introduced.
4. Members of the public were present:
B etty Williams stated the she feels that the practice building is too close to her property and too
high. She questioned why did they decided to put it there.
Applicant explained the scope of the project and that there will be staff there at all times to
monitor the activities of those practicing. They are willing to plant more trees to soften the
building's impact on the neighbors.
Associate Planner Marni Moseley mentioned that group classes may not be permitted by the
Conditional Use Permits and that parking would need to be reviewed.
Applicant responded that there will b e no parking at the Driving Range Practice building.
Associate Planner Marni Moseley mentioned that the Country Club has not been responsive to
the adjacent homeowner 's concerns and damages. The practice building does not appear to be
replaced in the location of the former building as shown on the proposed plans.
Applicant stated he thought it was close to the former location, within 10 feet.
Be tty Williams questioned the need to add seven more driving stalls.
Associate Planner Marni Moseley said that more information and clarity is needed on the
proposed improvements and that the 546-square foot golf practice building will be removed
from the Application description.
5 . Public hearing closed.
6. Marni Moseley moved to approve the application, with the scope of the application changed to
remove the 546-square foot golf practice building from the approval , subject to the conditions
presented with the following findings and considerations:
FINDINGS:
Required findings for CEQA:
• The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the
Implementation ofthe California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New
Co nstruction or Conversion of Small Structures.
DRC Minutes
July 14 ,2015
Page4
CONSIDERATIONS:
Considerations in review of Architecture & Site applications:
• As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an
architecture and site application were all made in reviewing this project.
7. Ryan Fang seconded, motion passed unanimously.
8. Appeal rights were cited.
OTHER BUSINESS
NONE
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 10:40 a .m. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Development Review
Committee is the following Tuesday.
~J.~~~~ Michae Machado , Building Of cial
N:\DEV\DRC\Min 2015 \7-14-15 .doc