02 Staff Report - Accept Staff Recommendations on County ReferralsCOUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE:
TO: MAYOR AND TO OUNCIL
FROM: TOWN MANAGE
November 15, 2001
MEETING DATE: 11/19/01
ITEM NO.
SUBJECT: ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON COUNTY REFERRALS
REFERRAL
NUMBER LOCATION APPLICANT REQUEST RECOMMENDATION
A. Projects Outside Urban Service Area:
None
B. Projects Inside Urban Service Area:
1840 14550 Deerpark Ct Richer Special Permit Denial
Variance
Design Review
The applicant is requesting approval to construct a 1,878 square foot two story detached structure on
a 3.30 acre parcel prezoned HR-20. The structure will contain a billiard room, exercise room, wet bar,
recreation room, closets and storage areas. In addition, the applicant is requesting two interior wetbars,
one exterior wetbar and two bathrooms. The maximum height of the structure will be approximately
25 feet. All setbacks will be met. The County is requiring a variance since the structure exceeds the
County's height requirement and is a two story structure. The Special Permit and the Design Review
applications are all tied to the Variance request. Staff cannot recommend approval of the applications
for the following reasons:
1. Staff does not believe that findings can be made to justify the variance since the requested variance
is to exceed the allowable height and the number of stories permitted for an accessory structure (see
Attachment 1). The lot is currently developed with a single family residence. The applicant has
submitted a letter of justification for the variance (Attachment 2).
PREPARED BY: BUD N. LORTZ
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Reviewed by: r9 Attorney Clerk Finance Community Development
Revised: 11 / 15/01 2: 3 9 pm
Reformatted: 5/23/01
PAGE 2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: COUNTY REFERRALS
November 15, 2001
2. Two story detached structures are not permitted.
3. The maximum height of the detached structure exceeds 15 feet in height from the finished grade.
Since the Town cannot make the required findings to justify the variance, a recommendation for denial
should be forwarded to the County.
C. Status of Previous Applications:
7843 &
7844
Frontage Rd -Hwy 17 Lexington Builders Inc
Building Site
Grading
The County of Santa Clara has not yet taken an action on the above referenced applications and is
currently working on developing conditions of approval (Attachment 3). One of the proposed
conditions is to require recordation of notice on the two properties acknowledging the existing
helicopter operations. In addition, the County is considering imposing a condition restricting the
location of any buildings or objects that would physically obstruct the flight path of the helicopter. The
County is working with the California Division of Forestry (CDF) on the flight path restrictions. The
County has determined that the proposed building sites will not physically interfere with CDF operation
of the helipad and has asked CDF to ensure that this conclusion is correct. Staff will keep Council
informed on the status of this application.
Attachments:
1. Required Findings.
2. Letter of Justification (two pages) received November 1, 2001.
3. Letter from County to CDF (three pages) received November 9, 2001.
Distribution:
Mr. Mike Lopez, Acting Land Development Coordinator, Central Permit Office, County Government
Center, East Wing, 70 W. Hedding Street, San Jose, CA 95110
Mark and Gwen Richer, 14550 Deerpark Court, Los Gatos, CA 95032
Don Fritsch, 440 N. Central Avenue #203, Campbell, CA 95008
McDougal Brothers Investments, PO Box 518, Creswell, Oregon 27426
Peabody Engineering, 1700 Alhambra Blvd, Suite 102, Sacramento, CA 95816
Brian Hinman, 37 Broadway, Los Gatos, CA 95030
Rachael Gibson, Office of the Board of Supervisors, County Government Center, East Wing,
70 W. Hedding Street, San Jose, CA 95110
John E. Ferreira, Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 15670 Monterey Road, Morgan Hill,
CA 95037
Jim Rogers, Lexington Builders Inc, 3707 Williams Road, Suite 202, San Jose, CA 95117
N:\DEV\CNCLRPTS\ 11-19-01.REF.wpd
c
REQUIRED FINDINGS
Sec. 29.20.170. Same --Findings and decision.
The deciding body, on the basis of the evidence submitted at the hearing, may grant a
variance if it finds that:
(1) Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of this ordinance
deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and
under identical zone; and
(2) The granting of a variance would not constitute a grant of special privileges
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in
which such property is situated.
ATTACHMENT 1
Nov 01 01 03:26p ArchiTypes
4082446850 p.3
/ �RCHI YPES
/ DESIGN & DRAFTING SERVICES
NOV 0 1 2001
TOWN Of" LOS GAiOr+
440 N. Central Avenue Suite 203 Campbell, CA 95008-1403 (408) 379-4325 FAX(408) 379-4329
STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE
Richer Residence Proposed Pool House
14550 Deer Park Court
Los Gatos, California
The requested variance is for a pool house and decks proposed to be built between an
existing tennis court and a newly built swimming pool at a distance of approximately 12
feet from the nearest corner of the existing two story residence/garage. The intended use
of the proposed pool house and decks is recreational use related to the swimming pool
(upper level) and the tennis court (lower level).
The proposed construction is classified as an accessory building and exceeds the
development standards in the overall height of the building (24'-10" from lowest adjacent
grade to highest point of roof) and in that the pool house is a two-story building where the
standards allow for only a one-story accessory building.
The special circumstances that attend to the subject property that underly the variance
request are two -fold: the size of the lot and its topography. The property is located in the
Los Gatos Specific Plan Area and is zoned RHS-20s-d1. The area of the lot is 3.3 acres
or 143, 748 sq. ft. Approximately 76% of the property is too steeply sloped for
development. The total floor area of the proposed pool house and decks is 4,446 sq. ft. or
3.09% of the lot area. The topography of the rear yard to the residence is such that the
main yard area which contains the swimming pool drops steeply approximately 9 feet to a
relatively level area which contains the tennis court. A single story pool house built at the
level of the swimming pool would require extensive fill beneath the entire floor area and
would not be easily accessible from the tennis court. A single story building placed at the
level of the tennis court would not be directly accessible from the pool area and the roof of
the building would be at eye level from the pool and rear yard perspective. The proposed
building design minimizes excavation and earth fill, flows well with the natural contours of
the surrounding grades and provides open and enclosed recreation spaces both at the
swimming pool and the tennis court levels. Furthermore, the level areas of the rear yard
whose topography favors a single story building are the only play areas available on this
hilly property and are minimal in size in proportion to the size of the lot. In relation to the
existing two story residence, the proposed pool house is clearly subordinate in size and
from most perspectives will appear as a single story building with a "basement". Since the
residence sits atop a knoll which rises approximately 32 feet above the street level and the
ATM :. YF'41
Nov 01 01 03:26p ArchiTypes
4082446850 p.4
Richer Pool House
page 2 of 2
proposed pool house is to be located beyond the rear of the residence, the proposed
construction will be almost completely out of sight from the street. The elevation of the
proposed construction which exposes both levels can be seen only by neighbors located
across a large canyon.
The granting of the requested variance permit would not constitute a grant of special
privilege vis-a-vis the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity of the subject
property insofar as other Tots in this area of a similar size with more typical topography,
i.e., less slope, would be permitted by the development standards to develop, in addition
to the developments existing on the subject property an area of approximately 20 times
the area of the proposed improvements (including both building and decks). Additionally,
a more level lot would allow the swimming pool and tennis court to be at the same
elevation, in which case a single story pool house would provide direct access from both
facilities.
Sent By: SANTA CLARA COUNTY PLANNING;
408 288 9198 ; Nov-9-01 5:27PM;
Page 2/4
County of Santa, Clara
Environmental Hesourc:es :\gency
planning office
C lwry Goverrancrii cc, Gast wing. 7trr Floor
7c.1 west Heckling StrC(
Sari Jose. California 951 10-1 70.3
(408i ,_+S)() :-; ; o FAX (408) _88-9108
www.sceplanning.org
California Division of Forestry
Attn: John E. Ferreira, Operations Chief
15670 Monterey Road
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
Subject: Single Building Site and Grading Approval
Files: #7843-00B-O0G and File # 7843-OOB-OOG
Dear Mr. Ferreira:
NovPrn1 er 4. 200l
ra.t
Nov 0 9 2001
TO)V.W OF 1 O GATOS
/` 9 ��Jt F
L9 ''�Jr ,. ATrv`
As you may be aware, this office is presently processing two single building site and
grading applications on property adjacent to the properly which presently houses the
California Division of Forestry Alma Helitack Base. It has been brought to the attention
of this office that approval of these applications and the conditions associated with the
approval of these applications may adversely impact the existing and future operations
of the helitack base.
Presently, preliminary conditions of approval associated with these applications are
being established. [n addition to conditions normally associated with building and
single site approval., staff is endeavoring to address the concerns expressed in
correspondence from the Town of Los Gatos and in and correspondence dated October
18, 2001 from you addressed to the Town.
Staff intends to include a condition to require recordation of a notice acknowledging
existing helicopter operations, thereby ensuring that current owners and subsequent
purchasers of the parcels would have had prior knowledge about the helipad
operations.
Staff has determined that the proposed building sites will not physically interfere witl-.
operation of the helipad (see attachment). However, in order to be assured of this
conclusion I am requesting that you confirm this conclusion and that you provide any
appropriate input regarding the potential need for any other conditions or restrictions
to accessory structures or other objects that night cause flight path obstructions.
The county is also considering imposing a condition restricting the location of any
buildings or objects, that would physically obstruct the flight path (s) for the helitack.
Please provide this office with more information about the flight path(s), in order to
establish sufficient language for this condition (e.g. trajectory, width of flight path,
necessary clearance.
Boi.erci of Stvorvisc)r..: Donald F. C:agtt, Blanca Alvarado. Pre N1c7Hu 11 James T. Beall Jr., Liz Kniss
County Executive: Richard witteriberg
sco.
ATTACHMENT 3
sent By: SANTA CLARA COUNTY PLANNING;
408 288 9198 ;
Nov-9-01 5:28PM; Page 3/4
Your response within the next two weeks would be greatly appreciated.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contract me at
408/299-5772.
Sincerg1 ,
Michael M. Ldp
Planning & Deve`pment Coordinator
cc: Ann Draper
Zachary Carter
Lizanne Reynolds
Carolyn Walsh
Rachael Gibson
Sandy Bailey
James Rogers
Sent By: SANTA CLARA COUNTY PLANNING; 408 288 9198 ; Nov-9-01 5:28PM; Page 4/4
T.18.2001 4:35PM TOWN LOS GATOS NO 630 P 8
000000,C
}fr o- A r r N
11 }} w � m t•j
♦ � Y N a V� �
r 3
3 u 3 3 3 a 3 w 3 3 3 3
•IL' 13 ilk titt41,13t
E b b
3 z 2 2 Oe Z p air y v; Qq 2
r M ; N N N w H N M A n C A
f ``# (G, LP y■, 3 2 1 w ( 3. m y am, {g+ w 3 3
~ k k N M iS k .� i L i k 6 i k n Ib!
2 g a A r Y b M soya 2 Z. 2 is O
0
4
Town Council Minutes November 19, 2001
Redevelopment Agency Los Gatos, California
HEARINGS CONTINUED
WINCHESTER BOULEVARD 15350 & 15390/RESOLUTION 2001-130/CONTINUED
Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mr. Pirzynski, to approve Architecture and Site Application
S-01-97 for the demolition, subject to conditions as listed in Attachment 4 of the staff report. Carried
unanimously.
COUNTY REFERRALS (02.31)
Ray Davis, resident, asked why Item C in the staff report had not been included on the Agenda. Staff
responded that it had been an oversight, and Item C should have been pointed out more clearly.
Motion by Mrs. Decker, seconded by Mr. Pirzynski, that Council accept the report conceming
County Referrals and noting Item C:
NUMBER LOCATION APPLICATION REQUEST RECOMMENDATION
A) None
B) 1840 14550 Deerpark Court Richer Special Permit Variance Denial
Design Review
C) 7843 Frontage Rd -Hwy 17 Lexington Builders Inc. Building Site Grading Staff is watching status
& 7844 Heliport Location
Carried unanimously.
PARKS COMMISSIONER/APPOINTMENTS/CHRIS WRIGHT/ANDREW RICHTER (08.12)
Motion by Mrs. Decker, seconded by Mr. Pirzynski, to affirm Student Parks Commissioner
appointments for Chris Wright and Andrew Richter. Carried by a vote of 4 ayes. Mr. Glickman
voted no saying he believed that the Council should have the opportunity to meet the student
candidates before making appointments.
TOWN ATTORNEY/AMENDMENT TO TOWN AGREEMENT/RESOLUTION 2001-131 (09.29)
Ray Davis, resident, spoke on the percentage of pay raise noted in the report. He also suggested part
time services for the position.
Motion by Mr. Pirzynski, seconded by Mrs. Decker, that Council adopt Resolution 2001-131
entitled, RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AND TOWN ATTORNEY AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO SIGN AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS.
Carried unanimously.
MILL RISE WAY 17150/RESIDENTIAL REMODEL/RESOLUTION (13.15)
Mayor Attaway announced that this was the time and place so noted to consider resolution of the
Town of Los Gatos granting and remanding to the Planning Commission an appeal of a decision of
the Planning Commission denying a request to remodel and add a new second story to a single family
residence and a grading permit to accommodate the first floor addition on property zoned hr-1.
Ray Davis, resident, stated that the proposed resolution conflicts with the adopted minutes of
November 5, 2001, in that the former calls for a reduction of the house to a size between 3,500 and
3,700 square feet, while the latter calls for a reduction by between 3,500 and 3,700 square feet. He
further stated that the minutes are correct, as specifically confirmed to him that same day by the
project architect.
TC:D13:MM111901 6