08-11-15 Minutes - DRCTOWN OF LOS GATOS
110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354-6874
SUMMARY MINUTES OF A REGULAR M E ETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITT EE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR AUGUST II, 2015 HELD IN THE TOWN
COUN C IL C HAMBE RS , CIVIC CENTER , 110 E AST M AIN STREET, LOS GATOS , CALIFORNIA .
The meeting was called to order at 10:02 a .m. by Chair Machado.
ATTENDANCE
Members Present :
J ennifer Savage, Senior Planne r
Marni Moseley, Associate Planner
Doug Harding, Fire Department
Michae l Ma c hado, Building Official
Mark Glendinning, Building Inspector
Mike Weisz , Ass o ciate Civil Eng ineer
Fle tch er Pars on, Contract Civil Engineer
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM 1: 15925 Quail Hill Road
Architecture and Site Application S-14-027
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single-fami ly residence and to
construct a new single-family residence on property zoned HR-l. APN 527-02-
007 .
PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT : Kevin Hwang and Sabrina Dong
PROJECT PLANNER : Marni Moseley
(Continued/rom 7/2112015)
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:
Doug Harding, Deputy Fire Marshal, summari zed the Fire Department Conditions of
Approval.
Mic hael Vi erhus, Architect , questioned if the conditions will also include a requirement for
turnaround.
Doug Harding responded that a fire truck turnaround will be required within 40 to 50 feet of
the project site.
Mic hael Vi erhus mentioned that he would like to meet with the Fire Department at the site to
work an acceptable location for the turnaround.
DRC Minutes
August 11,2015
Page 2
Mike Weisz, Associate Civil Engineer, presented a map showing where the actual access road is
out ofthe described easements and read an additional condition to address this situation.
Brad Krouskup stated that he had hoped that the 20-foot easement location would have been
resolved since the last meeting. He submitted a 1958 Grant Deed with a description of an
ingress/egress easement. He went on to state that the project as proposed does not serve his
and Dana Krouskup's best interest.
Sabrina Dong said that her surveyor has plotted the easement description.
Doug Harding questioned if the easement description includes the width. He said if not then it
is an easement with an undetermined width .
Brad Krouskup said that Chicago Title needs to explain where their other description originally
came from.
Fletcher Parson, Contract Civil Engineer, questioned if either Title Report describe the
easement width.
Brad Krouskup said the Title Report that he has does not. He suggested that Sabrina have her
Title Company review his document.
Marni Moseley, Associate Planner, stated that even though the description is incomplete, the
applicants do have legal access.
Fletcher Parson added that the applicants may have a prescriptive easement which would take
legal action to prove.
Brad Krouskup questioned whether access could be achieved from Drysdale Drive.
Michael Vierhus said that he and their Civil Engineer tried to design an access driveway but the
hill is just too steep.
Brad Krouskup believes it could be done and would like to leave that access as an option for
the development of the property.
Marni Mosely asked what revision would make the proposal acceptable to the Krouskups.
Development outside the LRDA would need to go to the Planning Commission for approval.
Brad Krouskup responded that his home directly faces the proposed project. The front doors
will be 60 feet from each other. As proposed, the applicants will have to use his property to
turnaround . A further front setback to 35 feet would allow the applicants to turnaround on
their own property.
DRC Minutes
August 11 ,2015
Page 3
Marni Mose ley explained that staff has reviewed the project for neighborhood compatibility
and compliance with the Town Code and Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines , in
addition, the Town's Architectural Consultant has reviewed the project and the applicants have
incorporated his suggestions into their design.
Brad Kroskup replied that the location is the biggest issue and he will have an Architect review
the proposal.
Michael Vi erhus commented, "Do neighbors now design their adjacent neighbor's hous e?"
Brad Kroskup continued that the access easements have still not been resolved and does not
comply with the road maintenance agreement in place.
John Livingstone, Consultant, questioned the off street parking in the front yard.
Marni Mos eley replied that the off street parking shown in the front yard are not required
parking spaces and are therefore permitted in the front setback.
Fle tcher Parsons added that Engineering did not know that there were still discrepancies
between the two Title Reports from Chicago Title and First American Title. He fe lt the
application should be continued for one more week to see if they can be reconciled.
Marni Mo seley suggested that she could put a placeholder for a future Planning Commission
Agenda item while the access easement descriptions are being resolved. She a lso suggested
that the Krouskups put their concerns in writing and that it might be poss ible to modify the
Conditions of Approval to address some of those concerns .
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Doug Harding moved to continue the application for one more week.
7. Mike We isz seconded, motion passed unanimously.
ITEM 2: 17101 Lo s Robles Way (Heard out of order)
Architecture and Site Application S-15-051
Reque sting approval of a time extension for a previous approval for a grading permit
for a new deck and retaining walls on property zoned R-1 :20. APN 53 2-36-072 .
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Karen Evenden
PROJECT PLANNER: Jennifer Savag e
1. Chair Ma chado opened the public hearing.
2 . Staff gave report on proposed project.
3. Applicant was introduced.
4. Members of the public were not present:
5 . Public hearing closed.
6. Doug Harding moved to approve the application s ubject to the conditions presented with the
following findings and considerations:
DRC Minutes
August II, 2015
Page4
FINDINGS
• As required by Section 29.20.325 of the Town Code for time extension requests :
(b) ( 1) There would be no legal impediment to granting a new application for the same approval.
(2) The conditions originally applied or new conditions to be applied as a part of the
extension approval are adopted to any new facts concerning the proposed project.
7. Mark Glendinning seconded, motion passed unanimously.
8. Appeal rights were cited .
OTHER BUSINESS-NONE
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 11 :20 a.m. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Development Review
Committee is the following Tuesday.
~M L~r"
Michael Machado, Building Official
N:\D EV\DRC\Min 2015 \8-ll-15 .doc