Loading...
09-13-22 Minutes - DRC 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT MINUTES OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 The Development Review Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Regular Teleconference Meeting on September 13, 2022, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. This meeting was conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and was conducted via Zoom. All committee members and staff participated from remote locations and all voting was conducted via roll call vote. In accordance with Executive Order N-29-20, the public could only view the meeting online and not in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present: Jennifer Armer, CDD Planning; Roy Alba, CDD Building; Corvell Sparks, PPW Engineering; and Kenny Ip, SCCFD. Staff: Erin Walters, CDD Planning; and Jocelyn Shoopman, CDD Planning. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 10:00 AM VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. CONSENT ITEMS 1. Approval of Minutes – July 19, 2022 MOTION: Motion by Kenny Ip to approve the consent calendar. Seconded by Corvell Sparks. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 4-0. PAGE 2 OF 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 N:\DEV\DRC\MINUTES\Min 2022\09-13-22 Minutes - DRC.docx PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. 14335 La Rinconada Drive Subdivision Application M-22-004 Requesting Approval for Subdivision of One Lot to Two Lots on Property Zoned R-1:8. APN: 409-14-026 PROPERTY OWNER: Nicholas Gera APPLICANT: Terence J. Szewczyk, TS Civil Engineering, Inc. PROJECT PLANNER: Erin Walters The project planner presented the staff report. Opened Public Comment. Terry Szewczyk, Applicant They are in agreement with the conditions of approval. Closed Public Comment. MOTION: Motion by Kenny Ip to approve with required findings and recommended conditions of approval. Seconded by Corvell Sparks. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 4-0. Appeal rights were recited. 3. 16635 Marchmont Drive Architecture and Site Application S-22-015 Requesting Approval for Demolition of an Existing Single-Family Residence and Construction of a New Single-Family Residence on Property Zoned R-1:8. APN 532-09- 040. PROPERTY OWNER: Raj and Jasneet Kullar APPLICANT: Gary Kohlsaat PROJECT PLANNER: Jocelyn Shoopman The project planner presented the staff report. Opened Public Comment. Gary Kohlsaat, Applicant After submitting their application, they worked with staff and Larry Cannon. Staff comments focused on reducing the mass of the second story and being mindful of the neighbors on either side. The second story was lowered by 18 inches on the left and right sides. PAGE 3 OF 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 N:\DEV\DRC\MINUTES\Min 2022\09-13-22 Minutes - DRC.docx Plates were lowered from nine foot six inches to eight feet. This is the lowest they can go and still preserve the ceiling height. Three bedrooms and three bathrooms will be in the second story. The owners are adamant about keeping the second story to preserve the backyard on their small lot. Other second story homes exist in the area. But their lots are larger and allow more distance from their neighbors. Neighbors expressed privacy concerns about the second story balcony off the bedroom. There’s an additional setback of three and half feet on the left side of the second story. The owners agreed to remove the balcony to deal with any privacy concerns with the rear neighbor. They met with neighbors on the left, about the loss of sunlight. Showed on the computer, that after 9 a.m., there is no shadowing on the neighbor’s house. Also showed that the shadowing from a one story house would only result in 30 minutes more of sunlight at 8:30 a.m. Adrian Rodriquez, neighbor They are concerned about the water and drainage plan. It seems designed to drain the water back to where it was pumped from. What does the soil report say about pumping water from the basement? Are there any contaminants in the water? Concerned about the size of the house. The majority of homes in the neighborhood are under 3,000 square feet. Quentin Mommaerts, neighbor They met with the applicant about the shading. In actuality, the computer showed a shadow gain of one hour and for half a year. Nothing was offered to ameliorate the shading. They were also concerned about the massing. There will be a big 20-foot wall that towers over their driveway. Not a particularly interesting view from their property. Debbie, neighbor They are concerned about the project’s mass and bulk. They began building a one story house with a view of the hills. They will lose 40 percent of their view. The story poles are in the worst spot to block the view from their home that they are building. A reduction in mass was mentioned and would be appreciated. Could the applicant explain it in more detail? Gary Kohlsaat, Applicant Engineering in PPW approved the plans. The soils report found no standing water for 20 feet. The plans were designed according to California standards. The correct daylight difference from one and two stories is not half an hour, but one hour for four months and not six months. The proposed structure will shade the neighbor’s house until 9:00 a.m. They lowered the entire house by 18 inches as shown by the story poles. The proposed house is very well designed and fits in with the Town. To break up the tall wall, they would like to continue the eave line on the first floor to the second story. They could increase the JADU to continue the roof without adding square footage. They could add a mechanical cabinet to break up the mass. PAGE 4 OF 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 N:\DEV\DRC\MINUTES\Min 2022\09-13-22 Minutes - DRC.docx Staff Those options could be added as a condition of approval. We could also continue the project to give more time to show the neighbor what those options would look like. Closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. Staff Suggest adding a condition to modify the side façade to reduce the look of the tall side wall. But leave the exact design up to the applicant and staff. This would not delay approval of the project. MOTION: Motion by Corvell Sparks to approve continuance to a date certain of Tuesday, September 20, 2022. Seconded by Kenny Ip. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 4-0. OTHER BUSINESS - None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned 10:34 a.m. This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the September 13, 2022 meeting as approved by the Development Review Committee. Prepared by: ________________________________________ /s/ Jennifer Armer, AICP, Planning Manager