Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Item 3 - Staff Report with Exhibits 1-14.16220 Harwood Lot B
PREPARED BY: Jocelyn Shoopman Associate Planner Reviewed by: Planning Manager 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6872 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 08/23/2023 ITEM NO: 3 DATE: August 18, 2023 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consider an Appeal of a Development Review Committee Decision to Approve Construction of a New Single-Family Residence for Lot B On Property Zoned R-1:10. Located at 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B. APN 567-18- 076. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction. Architecture and Site Application S-22-036. Property Owner: Majid Mohazzab. Applicant: Cherine Bassal. Appellant: Douglas McCracken. Project Planner: Jocelyn Shoopman. RECOMMENDATION: Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Development Review Committee (DRC) to approve the application, subject to the recommended conditions of approval. PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Zoning Designation: R-1:10, Single-Family Residential Applicable Plans & Standards: Town Code, General Plan, and Residential Design Guidelines Parcel Size: 11,810 square feet Surrounding Area: Existing Land Use General Plan Zoning North Residential Low Density Residential R-1:8 and R-1:10 South Residential Low Density Residential and Hillside Residential R-1:10 and HR-1 East Residential Low Density Residential City of San Jose West Residential Low Density Residential R-1:10 PAGE 2 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 CEQA: The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction. FINDINGS: ▪ Pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, this project is Categorically Exempt, Section 15303: New Construction. ▪ The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations). ▪ The project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines. CONSIDERATIONS: ▪ As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture and Site application. ACTION: The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed within ten days. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the east side of Harwood Road, adjacent to the intersection of Harwood Road and Belwood Gateway (Exhibit 1). The site is developed with a vacant commercial building previously occupied as a school. On October 13, 2020, the DRC approved a subdivision of the approximate, 34,676-square foot lot into three lots. On June 28, 2022, the applicant submitted an Architecture and Site application for the construction of a new 3,100-square foot two-story residence with a 530-square foot attached garage. Two additional Architecture and Site applications for Lots A and C were also submitted. The proposed project meets all technical requirements of the Town Code including setbacks, parking, height, floor area, and lot coverage. On July 11, 2023, the DRC approved the Architecture and Site application with additional conditions to address privacy concerns from the adjacent neighbor as detailed in the Discussion section of this report. The DRC also approved the two Architecture and Site applications for Lots A and C at the same meeting. PAGE 3 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 BACKGROUND (continued): On July 20, 2023, the decision of the DRC to approve the new home on Lot B was appealed to the Planning Commission by the adjacent neighbor (appellant), due to concerns regarding privacy and views (Exhibit 10). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood The subject property is located on the east side of Harwood Road, adjacent to the intersection of Harwood Road and Belwood Gateway (Exhibit 1). The property is developed with a vacant commercial building previously occupied by a school. The surrounding properties are comprised of single-family homes. B. Project Summary The applicant proposes construction of a new two-story single-family home with an attached garage. The proposed residence would be 3,100 square feet with a 530-square foot attached garage. The project plans in Exhibit 13 show a future Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU), which is not a part of this Architecture and Site application because it cannot be reviewed through a discretionary application in accordance with State ADU law. C. Zoning Compliance A single-family residence and garage are permitted in the R-1:10 zone. The proposed residence is in compliance with all applicable zoning regulations including floor area, height, setbacks, lot coverage, and parking. DISCUSSION: A. Architecture and Site Application Analysis The applicant is proposing to construct a new two-story single-family residence with 3,100 square feet of living floor area and a 530-square foot attached garage. The maximum height of the proposed residence is 28 feet, seven inches, where a maximum of 30 feet is allowed. The applicant provided a Letter of Justification detailing the proposal, whi ch is included as Exhibit 4. The development plans show a future JADU that is proposed to be contained within the first floor of the residence and is not being reviewed with this application per State law , and does not count towards the maximum allowed floor area for the site (Exhibit 13). The JADU PAGE 4 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 DISCUSSION (continued): is not a part of the Architecture and Site approval and would require a future submittal for a separate ministerial permit. A new JADU on the property would be subject to the requirements contained in Section 29.10.320 of the Town Code. B. Building Design The applicant proposes construction of a new-story single-family home with an attached garage in a traditional architectural style. Proposed exterior materials include smooth stucco, composition shingle roofing, carriages style garage doors, and aluminum windows (Exhibit 5). The Town’s Consulting Architect reviewed the project on July 20, 2022 (Exhibit 6). In the report, the Consulting Architect noted that the site is located in an established neighborhood with a mix of one- and two-story homes designed in traditional architectural styles, and that the proposed house is simple and well designed to fit into the immediate neighborhood. The Consulting Architect identified five concerns with the original design and made five recommendations for modifications. The Consulting Architect made the following recommendations to address consistency with the Residential Design Guidelines (RDG): 1. Add a trellis over the garage consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.4.1; 2. Eliminate the second-floor balcony or as a minimum fill in the balcony railing area with wall on all three exposed sides; 3. Continue the divided lite windows and projecting wal l trim around all sides of the house; 4. Utilize true or simulated divided lites to be consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.7.4; and 5. Reevaluate the wall materials for the homes on all three parcels, and consider some additional diversity of materials (e.g., using different materials on at least one of the homes or explore the use of a mix of materials). The applicant revised the project to incorporate each of the recommendations prior to DRC approval. C. Neighborhood Compatibility The immediate neighborhood is made up of one- and two-story single-family residences. Based on County records, the residences in the immediate neighborhood range in size from 2,346 square feet to 3,348 square feet. The floor area ratios (FAR) range from 0.21 to 0.33. The proposed residence would be 3,100 square feet (0.26 FAR) with a 530-square foot PAGE 5 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 DISCUSSION (continued): attached garage. Pursuant to Town Code Section 29.40.075, the maximum allowed FAR for the net lot area of 10,011 square feet, after the removal of the corridor portion of the lot, is 0.31 (3,103 square feet) with a maximum allowed garage size of 861 square feet. The table on the following page reflects the current conditions of the homes in the immediate neighborhood. The proposed residence would not be the largest home in the immediate neighborhood in terms of square footage or FAR. The proposed two-story residence would not be the first two-story in the neighborhood, and at a proposed height of 28 feet, seven inches it would not be the tallest (Sheet A1.3, Exhibit 13). D. Trees The Town’s Consulting Arborist prepared a report for the site and recommendations for the project (Exhibit 7). The Consulting Arborist recommends removal of six trees contained on the property due to their suitability for conservation with the proposed project. Of the six protected trees proposed to be removed, five are in very poor or poor condition. A tree in poor condition has a declining appearance with poor vigor, abnormal foliar color, size or density with potential irreversible decline, at least one significant structural problem, or multiple moderate defects that cannot be corrected and failure may occur at any time. Address Zoning House Garage Lot Size House FAR No. of Stories 101 Almond Blossom Ct.R-1:10 3,348 618 10,122 0.33 2 103 Almond Blossom Ct.R-1:10 2,544 651 10,183 0.25 2 105 Almond Blossom Ln.R-1:10 2,756 611 11,793 0.23 2 103 Almond Blossom Ln.R-1:10 2,596 629 10,682 0.24 2 107 Sebastian Ct.R-1:10 3,089 630 11,401 0.27 2 102 Sebastian Ct.R-1:10 2,989 630 10,188 0.29 2 16224 Harwood R-1:10 2,925 552 9,876 0.30 2 16226 Harwood R-1:10 2,804 473 13,463 0.21 2 16228 Harwood R-1:10 2,346 466 9,998 0.23 2 189 Belwood R-1:10 2,448 440 11,473 0.21 2 103 Belvale R-1:10 2,448 440 11,753 0.21 2 16220 Harwood, Lot A R-1:10 3,444 495 11,647 0.30 2 16220 Harwood, Lot B (Proposed)R-1:10 3,100 530 11,810 0.26 2 16220 Harwood, Lot C R-1:10 3,363 810 11,219 0.30 2 PAGE 6 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 DISCUSSION (continued): A tree in very poor condition has poor vigor and is dying with little foliage in irreversible decline, and severe defects with the likelihood of failure being probable or imminent (Exhibit 7). If the project is approved, tree protection measures would be implemented prior to and during construction. Replacement trees would also be required to be planted pursuant to the Town Code. E. Development Review Committee The DRC held a public hearing for the Architecture and Site application on July 11, 2023. Written public hearing notices were sent to surrounding property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the subject property. The following neighbors were in attendance and spoke on the item: • Douglas McCracken (Appellant); • Sally Jones; and • Nancy Durrett. The neighbors in attendance at the meeting raised concerns regarding the proposed architecture, setbacks, height, floor area, privacy, and traffic generation (Exhibit 9). The DRC found that the application was complete and in compliance with the Town Code and Residential Design Guidelines. Based on the findings and determinations, the DRC approved the proposed project, subject to modified conditions of approval in response to the concerns raised by the neighbors (Exhibit 3). The DRC approval included the addition of condition #5: 5. PRIVACY: To the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, the applicant shall provide privacy screening through all of the following methods: trees, lattice for the second story balcony, and clerestory windows on the second-floor rear elevation, when not required as an egress window by Building Code. F. Appeal On July 20, 2023, the decision of the DRC was appealed to the Planning Commission by the adjacent neighbor, Douglas McCracken (Exhibit 10). The appellant provided additional information for the appeal in Exhibit 11. The applicant submitted a response letter to the appeal in Exhibit 12. An abbreviated summary of the reasons for the appeal are provided below, followed by analysis in italic font. PAGE 7 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 DISCUSSION (continued): • At the DRC meeting, the three Architecture and Site applications were treated as a single application. The format did not allow for the community to property comment and provide input on all three properties. At the discretion of the Chair of the DRC, the three applications were discussed as a single item and the time limits for public comments were extended from three minutes to five minutes for each speaker. • During the DRC meeting, the community raised a question as to why the houses were not considered as a single-story house. Approximately, 40 percent of the Belwood/Belgatos homes are single-story. The RDG states that the greatest attention and appropriateness of design proposals will be given to the immediate neighborhood. The RDG interprets the immediate neighborhood to be the five homes across the street and the two homes on either side of the subject property. The homes along Almond Blossom Lane are comprised of two- story homes, while the homes along Harwood Road are comprised of both single-story and two-story homes. Based on the consideration of the immediate neighborhood, the proposal would not create the first two-story home. Additionally, the applicant has provided a response letter to the appeal, provided as Exhibit 12 stating that there are existing two-story homes adjacent to Lot B and that the proposed house on Lot B complies with the maximum height and is within the height range of other two-story homes in the neighborhood. • Lot B is the only flag lot in the Belwood/Belgatos neighborhood. All other properties in the neighborhood have a minimum front setback of 25 feet, plus a street between it and the adjacent property. On October 13, 2020, the DRC approved a subdivision of the approximate, 34,676-square foot lot into three lots. The DRC found that no findings could be made deny the application as required by Section 66474 of the State Subdivision Map Act. Additionally, the property located at 16226 Harwood Road is considered to be a flag lot. An appeal of the decision of the DRC was not received for the Subdivision application by the Town. The proposed Architecture and Site application complies with the minimum required 25- foot front setback, with a proposed setback of 36 feet, three inches. Additionally, the applicant has provided a response letter to the appeal, provided as Exhibit 12 stating that there is another flag lot in the immediate neighborhood, located at 16226 Harwood Road. The applicant states that Lot B will have its ow n access to the property, unlike the adjacent parcel located at 16226 Harwood which shares access with the adjacent properties. PAGE 8 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 DISCUSSION (continued): • While the Town Code and State law allows for a JADU to be permitted separately, it is illogical to not consider the entire structure when considering the Residential Design Guidelines. The development plans show a future JADU that is proposed to be contained within the first floor of the residence and is not being reviewed with this application per State law and does not count towards the maximum allowed floor area for the site. A JADU may not be considered as part of the Architecture and Site application, which is a discretionary action. The JADU would require a future submittal for a separate ministerial permit. A new JADU on the property would be subject to the requirements contained in Section 29.10.320 of the Town Code. Additionally, the applicant has provided a response letter to the appeal, provided as Exhibit 12 stating that they have the right to add an ADU to the property based on State law. • The Town is allowing the third largest structure on the most constrained lot in the neighborhood. There are two other larger structures within the development on Lot A and Lot C. The proposed residence is in compliance with all applicable zoning regulations including floor area, height, setbacks, lot coverage, and parking. Within the immediate neighborhood, the residence located at 101 Almond Blossom Court is larger in square footage at 3,348 square feet. Additionally, the homes located at 101 Almond Blossom Court, 107 Sebastian Court, 102 Sebastian Court, and 16224 Harwood Road have floor area ratios greater than the proposed residence, as reflected on page five of the staff report. Additionally, the applicant has provided a response letter to the appeal, provided as Exhibit 12 stating that there are several homes in the immediate neighborhood that are close to or more than 3,000 square feet in size and the proposed home for Lot B is in context with the size of other homes within the immediate neighborhood. • The story poles for Lot A and Lot C have been removed and the overpowering of the three total structures using minimal setbacks in the R-1:10 zone will not be viewable for Planning Commissioner’s site visit. Views of the east and west hills will be blocked by the development. An appeal of the Architecture and Site application for Lot A and Lot C was not received by the Town during the appeal period. As a result, the story poles for each lot have been removed as required by the Story Pole Policy. The residence for Lot B proposes an approximate front setback of 36 feet, three inches, a right-side setback of 11 feet, a left- side setback of 17 feet, and a rear setback of between 20 feet and 23 feet, six inches. The minimum required setbacks for the R-1:10 zone are 25 feet for the front, 10 feet for PAGE 9 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 DISCUSSION (continued): the side, and 20 feet for the rear. Pursuant to the RDG, views are not a protected right. Additionally, the applicant has provided a response letter to the appeal, provided as Exhibit 12 stating that the proposal for Lot B complies with all Town Code regulations for the R-1:10 zone. • The community is concerned that by ignoring the total size of the structures being proposed that the Town is setting a precedent for future developers in the Belwood/Belgatos neighborhood. The goal of affordable housing can be achieved with a single-story home. The neighbors do not believe that the proposed solution of lattice and trees will mitigate the privacy issues due to the sheet size of the structure and use of minimum setbacks. Pursuant to State law, a JADU may not be considered as part of a discretionary action. The Town’s ADU Ordinance provides regulations for the maximum size of a JADU based on State law. The maximum allowable floor area for the proposed residence, complies with Section 29.40.075 of the Town Code, which is not applicable to a future JADU. The applicant proposes a 3,100-square foot residence, whereas the maximum allowable floor area is 3,103 square feet. The development plans show a future 500-square foot JADU that is proposed to be contained within the first floor of the residence and is not being reviewed with this application per State law (Exhibit 13). The immediate neighborhood is made up of one and two-story single-family residences. The proposed residence would not be the largest home in the immediate neighborhood in terms of square footage or FAR and is in compliance with all applicable zoning regulations including floor area, height, setbacks, lot coverage. Additionally, the applicant has provided a response letter to the appeal, provided as Exhibit 12 stating that the height of the appellant’s home is taller than the home proposed on Lot B and that there are several windows overlooking Lot B and other neighboring residences. The applicant states that the proposed second floor windows for Lot B are approximately 60 feet away from the appellant’s backyard and approximately 90 feet from the residence, and the proposal for Lot B includes trees to be planted to provide additional privacy. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Public comments received between 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, July 11, 2023, and 11:00 a.m., Friday, August 18, 2023, are included as Exhibit 14. Story poles and the project sign including the hearing date, contact information, project description, and front elevation, were installed on the site; and the written notice of the DRC public hearing was sent to neighboring property owners and occupants. Following the appeal, written notice of the Planning Commission hearing was sent to neighboring property owners PAGE 10 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 PUBLIC COMMENTS (continued): and occupants, the story poles have remained in place, and the project sign has been updated to reflect the appeal hearing before Planning Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction. CONCLUSION: A. Summary The appellant is requesting that the Planning Commission reconsider the DRC’s decision to approve construction of a new-story residence and attached garage on property zoned R- 1:10, located at 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B due to privacy and view concerns. B. Recommendation For the reasons stated in this report, staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions to deny the appeal, uphold the decision of the Development Review Committee, and approve the Architecture and Site application: 1. Find that the proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction (Exhibit 2); 2. Make the finding that the project complies with the objective standards of Chapter 2 9 of the Town Code (Exhibit 2); 3. Make the finding required by the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines that the project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines (Exhibit 2); 4. Make the required considerations as required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture and Site application (Exhibit 2); and 5. Approve Architecture and Site Application S-22-036 with the conditions contained in Exhibit 3 and Development Plans in Exhibit 13. PAGE 11 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B/S-22-036 DATE: August 18, 2023 CONCLUSION (continued): C. Alternatives Alternatively, the Commission can: 1. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction; 2. Deny the appeal and approve the application with additional and/or modified conditions; or 3. Grant the appeal and deny the Architecture and Site application. EXHIBITS: 1. Location Map 2. Required Findings 3. Recommended Conditions of Approval 4. Letter of Justification 5. Color and Material Board 6. Consulting Architect’s Report 7. Consulting Arborist’s Report 8. Neighbor’s Contacted 9. July 20, 2023, Development Review Committee meeting minutes 10. Appeal of Development Review Committee, July 20, 2023 11. Additional Appellant Information 12. Applicant’s Response to Appeal 13. Development Plans 14. Public Comments Received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, August 18, 2023 This Page Intentionally Left Blank BEGONIA DRHARWOOD RDBELVUE DR BELVALE DR ALMOND BLOSSOM LN BACIGALUPI DR BELWOOD GATEWAY ZINNIA LN PEONY LN 16220 Harwood Road 0 0.250.125 Miles ° Update Notes:- Updated 12/20/17 to link to tlg-sql12 server data (sm)- Updated 11/22/19 adding centerpoint guides, Buildings layer, and Project Site leader with label EXHIBIT 1 This Page Intentionally Left Blank S:\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\08-23-2023\Item 3 - 16220 Harwood Lot B\Exhibit 2 - Required Findings.docx PLANNING COMMISSION – August 23, 2023 REQUIRED FINDINGS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR: 16220 Harwood Road Architecture and Site Application S-22-036 Consider an Appeal of a Development Review Committee Decision to Approve Construction of a New Single-Family Residence for Lot B On Property Zoned R-1:10. Located at 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B. APN 567-18-076. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction. PROPERTY OWNER: Majid Mohazzab APPLICANT: Cherine Bassal FINDINGS Required finding for CEQA: ■ The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction. Required compliance with the Zoning Regulations: ■ The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations). Required compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines: ■ The project is in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines for single- family residences not in hillside areas. The project was reviewed by the Town’s Consulting Architect. The applicant addressed each of the Town’s Consulting Architect recommendations. The proposed project has been found to be compatible with the Residential Design Guidelines and well designed to fit into the immediate neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS Required 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. EXHIBIT 2 This Page Intentionally Left Blank PLANNING COMMISSION – August 23, 2023 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 16220 Harwood Road Architecture and Site Application S-22-036 Consider an Appeal of a Development Review Committee Decision to Approve Construction of a New Single-Family Residence for Lot B On Property Zoned R-1:10. Located at 16220 Harwood Road, Lot B. APN 567-18-076. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction. PROPERTY OWNER: Majid Mohazzab APPLICANT: Cherine Bassal TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Planning Division 1. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval and in substantial compliance with the approved plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans and/or business operation shall be approved by the Community Development Director, DRC or the Planning Commission depending on the scope of the changes. 2. EXPIRATION: The approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code, unless the approval has been vested. 3. STORY POLES: The story poles on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of approval of the Architecture & Site application. 4. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood lights shall be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security. 5. PRIVACY: To the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, the applicant shall provide privacy screening through all of the following methods: trees, lattice for the second story balcony, and clerestory windows on the second-floor rear elevation, when not required as an egress window by Building Code. 6. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for any trees to be removed, as defined in the Town Code, prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. 7. EXISTING TREES: All existing trees shown on the plan and trees required to remain or to be planted are specific subjects of approval of this plan, and must remain on the site. 8. ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS: The developer shall implement, at their cost, all recommendations identified in the Arborist’s report for the project, on file in the Community Development Department. These recommendations must be incorporated in the building permit plans and completed prior to issuance of a building permit where applicable. EXHIBIT 3 9. TREE FENCING: Protective tree fencing and other protection measures shall be placed at the drip line of existing trees prior to issuance of demolition and building permits and shall remain through all phases of construction. Include a tree protection plan with the construction plans. 10. TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees shall be double-staked using rubber tree ties. 11. FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the front yard must be landscaped. 12. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement (“the Project”) from the Town shall defend (with counsel approved by Town), indemnify, and hold harmless the Town, its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claim, action, or proceeding (including without limitation any appeal or petition for review thereof) against the Town or its agents, officers or employees related to an approval of the Project, including without limitation any related application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, compliance or failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, and/or processing methods (“Challenge”). Town may (but is not obligated to) defend such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all at applicant’s sole cost and expense. Applicant shall bear any and all losses, damages, injuries, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, staff time and in-house attorney’s fees on a fully-loaded basis, attorney’s fees for outside legal counsel, expert witness fees, court costs, and other litigation expenses) arising out of or related to any Challenge (“Costs”), whether incurred by Applicant, Town, or awarded to any third party, and shall pay to the Town upon demand any Costs incurred by the Town. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all the applicant’s sole cost and expense. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in processing methods shall alter the applicant’s indemnity obligation. 13. WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: The final landscape plan shall meet the Town of Los Gatos Water Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. A review fee based on the current fee schedule adopted by the Town Council is required when working landscape and irrigation plans are submitted for review. 14. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM: A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building plans detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. Building Division 15. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Demolition Permit is required for the demolition of the existing structures. A separate Building Permit is required for the construction of the new single - family residence and attached garage. An additional Building Permit is required for the PV System that will be required by the California Energy Code. 16. APPLICABLE CODES: The current codes, as amended and adopted by the Town of Los Gatos as of January 1, 2023, are the 2022 California Building Standards Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Parts 1-12, including locally adopted Energy Reach Codes. 17. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. 18. BUILDING & SUITE NUMBERS: Submit requests for new building addresses to the Building Division prior to submitting for the building permit application process. 19. SIZE OF PLANS: Minimum size 24” x 36”, maximum size 30” x 42”. 20. REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETE DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURE: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application and a Bay Area Air Quality Management District Application from the Building Department Service Counter. Once the demolition form has been completed, all signatures obtained, and written verification from PG&E that all utilities have been disconnected, return the completed form to the Building Department Service Counter with the Air District’s J# Certificate, PG&E verification, and three (3) sets of site plans showing all existing structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and PG&E. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a permit from the Town. 21. SOILS REPORT: A Soils Report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official, containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with the Building Permit Application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer specializing in soils mechanics. 22. SHORING: Shoring plans and calculations will be required for all excavations which exceed five (5) feet in depth, or which remove lateral support from any existing building, adjacent property, or the public right-of-way. Shoring plans and calculations shall be prepared by a California licensed engineer and shall confirm to the Cal/OSHA regulations. 23. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall be submitted to the project Building Inspector at foundation inspection. This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the Soils Report, and that the building pad elevations and on -site retaining wall locations and elevations have been prepared according to the approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered Civil Engineer for the following items: a. Building pad elevation b. Finish floor elevation c. Foundation corner locations d. Retaining wall(s) locations and elevations 24. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance Forms must be blue-lined (sticky-backed), i.e., directly printed, onto a plan sheet. 25. TOWN RESIDENTIAL ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: New residential units shall be designed with adaptability features for single-family residences per Town Resolution 1994-61: a. Wood backing (2” x 8” minimum) shall be provided in all bathroom walls, at water closets, showers, and bathtubs, located 34 inches from the fl oor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars if needed in the future. b. All passage doors shall be at least 32-inch-wide doors on the accessible floor level. c. The primary entrance door shall be a 36-inch-wide door including a 5’x 5’ level landing, no more than 1 inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level and with an 18-inch clearance at interior strike edge. d. A door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance. 26. BACKWATER VALVE: The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.50.025. Please provide information on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Town of Los Gatos Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole. 27. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: All projects in the Town of Los Gatos require Class A roof assemblies. 28. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704, the Architect or Engineer of Record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the Building Permit. The Town Special Inspection form must be completely filled-out and signed by all requested parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 29. BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (page size same as submitted drawings) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 30. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Community Development – Planning Division: (408) 354-6874 b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5771 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 d. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407 e. Local School District: The Town will forward the paperwork to the appropriate school district(s) for processing. A copy of the paid receipt is required prior to permit issuance. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS: Engineering Division 31. Dedications: Please submit the required materials and payment to Town of Los Gatos to begin the process. A fee of $829.00 and a deposit of $2,500 is required for our surveyor peer review time + materials. Unused deposit funds will be returned to the applicant. 32. Encroachment Permit: All work in the public right-of-way will require a Construction Encroachment Permit. All work over $5,000 will require construction security. It is the responsibility of the Owner to obtain any necessary encroachment permits f rom affected agencies and private parties, including but not limited to, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), AT&T, Comcast, Santa Clara Valley Water District, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Copies of any approvals or permits must be submitted to the Town Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to releasing any permit. 33. Grading Permit: Grading permit plans required. Please see items 238 -256 in Town of Los Gatos Fee Schedule for pricing. More information provided in COA 21 below and after DRC/PC approval. 34. PAYMENT OPTIONS: All payments regarding fees and deposits can be mailed to: Town of Los Gatos PPW – Attn: Engineering Dep 41 Miles Avenue Los Gatos, CA 95030 Or hand deliver/drop off payment in engineering lock box. Checks made out to “Town of Los Gatos” and should mention address and application number on memo/note line. 35. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all the conditions of approval listed below and in substantial compliance with the latest reviewed and approved development plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans or conditions of approvals shall be approved by the Town Engineer. 36. GENERAL: All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Plans, Standard Specifications and Engineering Design Standards. All work shall conform to the applicable Town ordinances. The adjacent public right -of-way shall be kept clear of all job-related mud, silt, concrete, dirt and other construction debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless an encroachment permit is issued by the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. The Owner’s representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right -of-way according to this condition may result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or stop work orders and the Town performing the required maintenance at the Owner’s expense 37. CONSTRUCTION PLAN REQUIREMENTS: Construction drawings shall comply with Section 1 (Construction Plan Requirements) of the Town’s Engineering Design Standards, which are available for download from the Town’s website. 38. PRIOR APPROVALS: All conditions per prior approvals shall be deemed in full force and affect for this approval. 39. CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY: Prior to initial occupancy and any subsequent change in use or occupancy of any non-residential condominium space, the buyer or the new or existing occupant shall apply to the Community Development Department and obtain approval for use determination and building permit and obtain inspection approval for any necessary work to establish the use and/or occupancy consistent with that intended. 40. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT: All work in the public right-of-way will require a Construction Encroachment Permit. All work over $5,000 will require construction security. It is the responsibility of the Owner to obtain any necessary encroachment permits from affected agencies and private parties, including but not limited to, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), AT&T, Comcast, Santa Clara Valley Water District, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Copies of any approvals or permits must be submitted to the Town Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to releasing any permit. 41. PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (INDEMNITY AGREEMENT): The property owner shall enter into an agreement with the Town for all existing and proposed private improvements within the Town’s right-of-way. The Owner shall be solely responsible for maintaining the improvements in a good and safe condition at all times and shall indemnify the Town of Los Gatos. The agreement must be completed and accepted by the Director of Parks and Public Works, and subsequently recorded by the Town Clerk at the Santa Clara County Office of the Clerk-Recorder, prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. Please note that this process may take approximately si x to eight (6-8) weeks. 42. GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE: The property owner shall provide proof of insurance to the Town on a yearly basis. In addition to general coverage, the policy must cover all elements encroaching into the Town’s right-of-way. 43. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting any work pertaining to on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the Town's right-of-way. Failure to do so will result in penalties and rejection of any work that occurred without inspection. 44. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc., shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Any new concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. The restoration of all improvements identified by the Engineering Construction Inspector shall be completed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. 45. SITE SUPERVISION: The General Contractor shall provide qualified supervision on the job site at all times during construction. 46. STREET/SIDEWALK CLOSURE: Any proposed blockage or partial closure of the street and/or sidewalk requires an encroachment permit. Special provisions such as limitations on works hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manner may be required. 47. PLAN CHECK FEES: Plan check fees associated with the Grading Permit shall be deposited with the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to th e commencement of plan check review. 48. INSPECTION FEES: Inspection fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits or recordation of the Parcel / Final Map. 49. DESIGN CHANGES: Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be subject to the approval of the Town prior to the commencement of any and all altered work. The Owner’s project engineer shall notify, in writing, the Town Engineer at least seventy -two (72) hours in advance of all the proposed changes. Any approved changes shall be incorporated into the final “as-built” plans. 50. PLANS AND STUDIES: All required plans and studies shall be prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of California and submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval. Additionally, any post-project traffic or parking counts, or other studies imposed by the Planning Commission or Town Council shall be funded by the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer. 51. GRADING PERMIT: A grading permit is required for all site grad ing and drainage work except for exemptions listed in Section 12.20.015 of The Code of the Town of Los Gatos (Grading Ordinance). After the preceding Architecture and Site Application has been approved by the respective deciding body, the grading permit application (with grading plans and associated required materials and plan check fees) shall be made to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department located at 41 Miles Avenue. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, retaining wall location(s), driveway, utilities and interim erosion control. Grading plans shall list earthwork quantities and a table of existing and proposed impervious areas. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks and Public Works, the grading permit will be issued concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for work outside the building footprint(s). Prior to Engineering signing off and closing out on the issued grading permit, the Owner’s soils engineer shall verify, with a stamped and signed letter, that the grading activities were completed per plans and per the requirements as noted in the soils report. A separate building permit, issued by the Building Department, located at 110 E. Main Street, is needed for grading within the building footprint. 52. GRADING PERMIT DETERMINATION DURING CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS: In the event that, during the production of construction drawings and/or during construction of the plans approved with this application by the Town of Los Gatos, it is determined that a grading permit would be required as described in Chapter 12, Article II (Grading Permit) of the Town Code of the Town of Los Gatos, an Architecture and Site Application would need to be submitted by the Owner for review and approval b y the Development Review Committee prior to applying for a grading permit. 53. ILLEGAL GRADING: Per the Town’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule, applications for work unlawfully completed shall be charged double the current fee. As a result, the required grading permit fees associated with an application for grading will be charged accordingly. 54. DRIVEWAY: The driveway conform to existing pavement on Almond Blossom and Harwood shall be constructed in a manner such that the existing drainage patterns will not be obstructed. 55. TREE REMOVAL: Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. 56. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits or the commencement of any site work, the general contractor shall: a. Along with the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer, attend a pre -construction meeting with the Town Engineer to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance and other construction matters; b. Acknowledge in writing that they have read and understand the project conditions of approval and will make certain that all project sub -contractors have read and understand them as well prior to commencing any work, and that a copy of the project conditions of approval will be posted on-site at all times during construction. 57. DEMOLITION: Within 60-days of the Development Review Committee approval action being final (i.e. after the 10-day appeal period and no requested appeals being submitted to the Town), the Property Owner shall record a Deed Restriction on each of the 3 parcels in question which prohibits the recording of a Certificate of Compliance until one of the two (2) prerequisite actions occurs prior to the proposed recordation: 1) removal of any structures which cross lot/property lines or 2) the Property Owner successfully obtaining an Architecture & Site approval from the Town of Los Gatos for the demolition of the existing house and construction of a replacement house. 58. SOILS REPORT: One electronic copy (PDF) of the soils report shall be submitted with the application. The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards governing site grading, drainage, pavement design, retaining wall design, and erosion control. The reports shall be signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or geologist, in conformance with Section 6735 of the California Business and Professions Code. 59. GEOLOGY AND SOILS MITIGATION MEASURE: A geotechnical investigation shall be conducted for the project to determine the surface and sub-surface conditions at the site and to determine the potential for surface fault rupture on the site. The geotechnical study shall provide recommendations for site grading as well as the design of foundations, retaining walls, concrete slab-on-grade construction, excavation, drainage, on-site utility trenching and pavement sections. All recommendations of the investigation shall be incorporated into project plans. 60. SOILS ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION: During construction, all excavation s and grading shall be inspected by the Owner’s soils engineer prior to placement of concrete and/or backfill so they can verify that the actual conditions are as anticipated in the design-level geotechnical report and recommend appropriate changes in the recommendations contained in the report, if necessary. The results of the construction observation and testing shall be documented in an “as-built” letter/report prepared by the Owner’s soils engineer and submitted to the Town before a certificate of occu pancy is granted. 61. SOIL RECOMMENDATIONS: The project shall incorporate the geotechnical/geological recommendations contained in the project’s design -level geotechnical/geological investigation as prepared by the Owner’s engineer(s), and any subsequently req uired report or addendum. Subsequent reports or addendum are subject to peer review by the Town’s consultant and costs shall be borne by the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer. 62. WATER METER: The existing water meter, currently located within the Town of Los Gatos right-of-way, shall be relocated within the property in question, directly behind the public right-of-way line. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any portion of concrete flatwork within said right-of-way that is damaged during this activity prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 63. SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT: The existing sanitary sewer cleanout, currently located within the Town of Los Gatos right-of-way, shall be relocated within the property in question, within one (1) foot of the property line per West Valley Sanitation District Standard Drawing 3, or at a location specified by the Town. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any portio n of concrete flatwork within said right-of-way that is damaged during this activity prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 64. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: The Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department will not sign off on a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy or a Final Certificate of Occupancy until all required improvements within the Town’s right-of-way have been completed and approved by the Town. 65. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE MEASURES: Projects which propose work within the Town’s right-of-way, including but not limited to pavement restoration, street widening, construction of curb, gutter and/or sidewalk, right -of-way dedication, etc., will be evaluated by Staff to determine its potential for the implementation of Green Infrastructure measures and associated improvements. 66. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS: The Developer shall be required to improve the project’s public frontage (right-of-way line to centerline and/or to limits per the direction of the Town Engineer) to current Town Standards. These improvements may include but not limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway approach(es), curb ramp(s), signs, pavement, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, storm drain facilities, traffic signal(s), street lighting (upgrade and/or repaint) etc. Plans for the improvements must be approved by the Town prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before the issuance of any grading or building permits unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. 67. UTILITIES: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall install all new, relocated, or temporarily removed utility services, including telephone, electric power and all other communications lines underground, as required by Town Code Section 27.50.015(b). All new utility services shall be placed underground. Underground conduit shall be provided for cable television service. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer is required to obtain approval of all proposed utility alignments from any and all utility service providers before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. The Town of Los Gatos does not approve or imply approval for final alignment or design of these facilities. 68. UTILITY EASEMENTS: Deed restrictions shall be placed on lots containing utility easements. The deed restrictions shall specify that no trees, fences, structures or hardscape are allowed within the easement boundaries, and that maintenance access must be provided. The Town will prepare the deed language and the Owner’s surveyor shall prepare the legal description and plat. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall pay any recordation costs. The documents shall be recorded before any grading or permits are issued. 69. SIDEWALK REPAIR: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any sidewalk damaged now or during construction of this project. All new and existing adjacent infrastructure must meet current ADA standards. Sidewalk repair shall match existing color, texture and design, and shall be constructed per Town Standard Details. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. The limits of sidewalk repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the project. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. 70. CURB AND GUTTER REPAIR: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any curb and gutter damaged now or du ring construction of this project. All new and existing adjacent infrastructure must meet Town standards. New curb and gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Details. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. The limits of curb and gutter repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the project. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. 71. VALLEY GUTTER REPAIR: The Owner/Applicant shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any valley gutter damaged now or during construction of this project. All new and existing adjacent infrastructure must meet Town standards. New valley gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Details. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. The limits of valley gutter repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the project. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. 72. DRIVEWAY APPROACH: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall install 3 Town standard residential driveway approaches. The new driveway approaches shall be constructed per Town Standard Plans and must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. 73. FENCING: Any fencing proposed within two hundred (200) feet of an intersection shall comply with Town Code Section §23.10.080. 74. SIGHT TRIANGLE AND TRAFFIC VIEW AREA: Any proposed improvements, including but not limiting to trees and hedges, will need to abide by Town Code Sections 23.10.080, 26.10.065, and 29.40.030. 75. FENCES: Fences between all adjacent parcels will need to be located on the property lines/boundary lines. Any existing fences that encroach into the neighbor’s property will need to be removed and replaced to the correct location of the boundary lines before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. Waiver of this condition will require signed and notarized letters from all affected neighbors. 76. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS (TRAFFIC) (for developments and subdivisions): The Developer shall construct improvements including and may not be limited to signage, striping, curb/gutter/sidewalk, ADA ramps, pedestrian crosswalk, street lights, and traffic signal(s) at project frontage as directed by the Town Engineer. Plans for the improvements must be approved by the Town prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before the issuance of any grading or building permits unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. 77. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION FEE: Prior to the issuance of a building permits, the Owner shall pay the project's proportional share of transportation improvements need ed to serve cumulative development within the Town of Los Gatos. The fee amount will be based upon the Town Council resolution in effect at the time the building permit is issued. 78. CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE PARKING: No construction vehicles, trucks, equipment and worker vehicles shall be allowed to park on the portion of any public (Town) streets without written approval from the Town Engineer. 79. CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC CONTROL: All construction traffic and related vehicular routes, traffic control plan, and applicable pedestrian or traffic detour plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town Engineer prior to the issuance of an encroachment, grading or building permit. 80. ADVANCE NOTIFICATION: Advance notification of all affected residents and emergency services shall be made regarding parking restriction, lane closure or road closure, with specification of dates and hours of operation. 81. HAULING OF SOIL (for developments and subdivisions): Hauling of soil on - or off-site shall not occur during the morning or evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.), and at other times as specified by the Director of Parks and Public Works. Prior to the issuance of an encroachment, grading or building permit, the Developer or their representative shall work with the Town Building Department and Engineering Division Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on or off the project site. This may include, but is not limited to provisions for the Developer to place construction notification signs noting the dates and time of constructio n and hauling activities, or providing additional traffic control. Coordination with other significant projects in the area may also be required. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose debris. 82. CONSTRUCTION HOURS: All subdivision improvement and site improvement construction activities, including the delivery of construction materials, labors, heavy equipment, supplies, etc., shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Saturdays. The Town may authorize, on a case-by-case basis, alternate construction hours. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall provide written notice twenty-four (24) hours in advance of modified construction hours. Approval of this request is at discretion of the Town. 83. CONSTRUCTION NOISE: Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Saturdays, construction, alteration or repair activities shall be allowed. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding eighty-five (85) dBA at twenty-five (25) feet from the source. If the device is located within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made at distances as close to twenty-five (25) feet from the device as possible. The noise level at any point out side of the property plane shall not exceed eighty-five (85) dBA. 84. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the Owner and/or Applicant’s design consultant shall submit a construction management plan sheet (full-size) within the plan set that shall incorporate at a minimum the Earth Movement Plan, Traffic Control Plan, Project Schedule, site security fencing, employee parking, construction staging area, materials storage area(s), construction trailer(s), concrete washout(s) and proposed outhouse locations. Please refer to the Town’s Construction Management Plan Guidelines document for additional information. 85. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs): The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and that such measures are implemented. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be maintained and be placed for all areas that have been graded or disturbed and for all material, equipment and/or operations that need protection. Removal of BMPs (temporary removal during construction activities) shall be replaced at the end of each working day. Failure to comply with the construction BMP will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or stop work orders. 86. STORMWATER DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF: All new development and redevelopment projects are subject to the stormwater development runoff requirements. Every Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their design consultant shall submit a stormwater control plan and implement conditions of approval that reduce stormwater pollutant discharges through the construction, operation and maintenance of treatment measures and other appropriate source control and site design measures. Increases in runoff volume and flows shall be managed in accordance with the development runoff requirements. 87. REGULATED PROJECT: The project is classified as a Regulated Project per Provision C.3.b.ii. and is required to implement LID source control, site design, and stormwater treatment on-site in accordance with Provisions C.3.c. and C.3.d. 88. SITE DESIGN MEASURES: All projects shall incorporate at least one of the followin g measures: a. Protect sensitive areas and minimize changes to the natural topography. b. Minimize impervious surface areas. c. Direct roof downspouts to vegetated areas. d. Use porous or pervious pavement surfaces on the driveway, at a minimum. e. Use landscaping to treat stormwater. 89. IMPAIRED WATER BODIES: Projects that discharge directly to CWA section 303(d) listed water bodies shall implement appropriate source control, site design and treatment measures for the listed pollutants of concern. 90. UNLAWFUL DISCHARGES: It is unlawful to discharge any wastewater, or cause hazardous domestic waste materials to be deposited in such a manner or location as to constitute a threatened discharge, into storm drains, gutters, creeks or the San Francisco Bay. Unlawful discharges to storm drains include, but are not limited to: discharges from toilets, sinks, industrial processes, cooling systems, boilers, fabric cleaning, equipment cleaning or vehicle cleaning. 91. LANDSCAPING: In finalizing the landscape plan for the biotreatment area(s), it is recommended that the landscape architect ensure that the characteristics of the selected plants are similar to those of the plants listed for use in bioretention areas in Appendix D of the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP) C.3 Stormwater Handbook. 92. EROSION CONTROL: Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. A Notice of Intent (NOI) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be submitted to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board for projects disturbing more than one (1) acre. A maximum of two (2) weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stabilizing/building on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. Interim erosion control measures, to be carried out during construction and before installation of the final landscaping, shall be included. Interim erosion control method shall include, but are not limited to: silt fences, fiber rolls (with locations and details), erosion control blankets, Town standard seeding specification, filter berms, check dams, retention basins, etc. Provide erosion control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during winter months. The grading, drainage, erosion control plans and SWPPP shall be in compliance with applicable measures contained in the amended provisions C.3 and C.14 of most current Santa Clara County National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP). Monitoring for erosion and sediment control is required and shall be performed by the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) or Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (QSP) as required by the Construction General Permit. Stormwater samples are required for all discharge locations and projects may not exceed limits set forth by the Construction General Permit Numeric Action Levels and/or Numeric Effluent Levels. A Rain Event Action Plan (REAP) must be developed forty-eight (48) hours prior to any likely precipitation even, defined by a fifty (50) percent or greater probability as determined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and/or whenever rain is imminent. The QSD or QSP must print and save records of the precipitation forecast for the project location area from (http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast) which must accompany monitoring reports and sampling test data. A rain gauge is required on-site. The Town of Los Gatos Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department and the Building Department will conduct periodic NPDES inspections of the site throughout the recognized storm season to verify compliance with the Construction General Permit and Stormwater ordinances and regulations. 93. DUST CONTROL: Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing construction activities so that paving and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading, and by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. Further, water trucks shall be present and in use at the construction site. All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often as deemed necessary by the Town, or a minimum of three (3) times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites in order to insure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. Watering on public streets shall not occur . Streets shall be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Town Engineer, or at least once a day. Watering associated with on-site construction activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one (1) late-afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. All public streets soiled or littered due to this construction activity shall be cleaned and swept on a daily basis during the workweek to the satisfaction of the Town. Demolition or earthwork activities shall be halted when wind speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed twenty (20) miles per hour (MPH). All trucks hauling soil, sand, or other loose debris shall be covered. 94. AIR QUALITY: To limit the project’s construction-related dust and criteria pollutant emissions, the following the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)- recommended basic construction measures shall be included in the project’s grading plan, building plans, and contract specifications: a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day, or otherwise kept dust - free. b. All haul trucks designated for removal of excavated soil and demolition debris from site shall be staged off-site until materials are ready for immediate loading and removal from site. c. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, debris, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. d. As practicable, all haul trucks and other large construction equipment shall be staged in areas away from the adjacent residential homes. e. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day, or as deemed appropriate b y Town Engineer. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. An on -site track-out control device is also recommended to minimize mud and dirt-track-out onto adjacent public roads. f. All vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to fifteen (15) m iles per hour. g. All driveways and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number an d person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within forty-eight (48) hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Please provide the BAAQMD’s complaint number on the sign: 24-hour toll-free hotline at 1-800-334- ODOR (6367). i. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed twenty (20) miles per hour. j. Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established. 95. DETAILING OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, all pertinent details of any and all proposed stormwater management facilities, including, but not limited to, ditches, swales, pipes, bubble -ups, dry wells, outfalls, infiltration trenches, detention basins and energy dissipaters, shall be provided on submitted plans, reviewed by the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department, and approved for implementation. 96. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: All construction shall conform to the latest requirements of the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks for Construction Activities and New Development and Redevelopment, the Town's grading and erosion control ordinance, and other generally accepted engineering practices for erosion control as required by the Town Engineer when undertaking construction activities. 97. SITE DRAINAGE: Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb drains will be allowed. Any storm drain inlets (public or private) directly connected to public storm system shall be stenciled/signed with appropriate “NO DUMPING - Flows to Bay” NPDES required language. On-site drainage systems for all projects shall include one of the alternatives included in section C.3.i of the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. These include storm water reuse via cisterns or rain barrels, directing runoff from impervious surfaces to vegetated areas and use of permeable surfaces. No improvements shall obstruct or divert runoff to the detriment of an adjacent, downstream or down slope property. 98. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall construct and install a private on-site storm drain system that is adequately sized to collect and convey adjacent off-site tributary drainage. Hydraulic calculations for a 100-year storm event shall provide documentation that the proposed storm drain system can convey said off-site drainage as well as on-site drainage during this event over, within, through and off the site, and ultimately into the Town’s storm drain system. 99. SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is the responsibility of Contractor and homeowner to make sure that all dirt tracked into the public right -of-way is cleaned up on a daily basis. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris SHALL NOT be washed into the Town’s storm drains. 100. GOOD HOUSEKEEPING: Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times during the course of construction. All construction shall be diligently supervised by a person or persons authorized to do so at all times during working hours. The Owner’s representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in penalties and/or the Town performing the required maintenance at the Owner’s expense. 101. PERMIT ISSUANCE: Permits for each phase; reclamation, landscape, and grading, shall be issued simultaneously. 102. COVERED TRUCKS: All trucks transporting materials to and from the site shall be covered. 103. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT: The Owner, Applicant and/or Develop er shall enter into an agreement to construct public improvements in accordance with Town Code Section 24.40.020. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall supply suitable securities for all public improvements that are part of the development in a form acceptable to the Town in the amount of 100% performance and 100% labor and materials prior to the issuance of any encroachment, grading or building permit. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall provide two (2) copies of documents verifying the cos t of the public improvements to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. A copy of the executed agreement shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to the issuance of any encroachment, grading or building permit. 104. ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall submit a seventy-five (75) percent progress printing to the Town for review of above ground utilities including backflow prevention devices, fire department connections, gas and water meters, off-street valve boxes, hydrants, site lighting, electrical/communication/cable boxes, transformers, and mail boxes. Above ground utilities shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Develop ment Department prior to issuance of any permit. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT: 105. REVIEW: Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access, water supply and may include specific additional requirements as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable construction permits. 106. NOTE: The subject property is located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) of the Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) 4290, the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection is required to “..adopt regulations implementing minimum fire safety standards related to defensible space: applicable to “the perimeters and access to all residential, commercial, and industrial building construction.” In 2018, the Legislature passed, and the Governor signed SB 901 (Dodd), which expanded the applicability of the regulations promulgated under PRC 4290 to land in the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. All comments below that result from PRC 4290 are identified by**. 107. FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet A1.0B) An automatic residential fire sprinkler system shall be installed in one- and two-family dwellings as follows: 1) In all new one- and two-family dwellings and in existing one- and two-family dwellings when additions are made that increase the building area to more than 3,600 SF whether by increasing the area of the primary residence or by creation of an attached Accessory Dwelling Unit. 2) In all new basements and in existing basements that are expanded by more than 50%. 3) In all attached ADUs, additions or alterations to an existing one- and two-family dwelling that have an existing fire sprinkler system. Exceptions: 1) One or more additions made to a building after January 1, 2011 that does not total more than 1,000 square feet of building area and meets all access and water supply requirements of Chapter 5 and Appendix B and C of the 2019 California Fire Code. 2) Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, provided that all of the following are met: a) The unit meets the defini tion of an Accessory Dwelling Unit as defined in the Government Code Section 65852.2. b) The existing primary residence does not have automatic fire sprinklers. c) The detached ADU does not exceed 1,200 square feet in size. d) The unit is on the same lot as the primary residence. e) The unit meets all access and water supply requirements of Chapter 5 and Appendix B and C of the 2019 California Fire Code. 108. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: (Letter received) The minimum require fire flow for this project is 875 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. This fire flow assumes installation of automatic fire sprinklers per CFC [903.3.1.3] 109. FIRE APPARATUS (ENGINE) ACCESS DRIVEWAY REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet C-2) An access driveway shall be provided having an all-weather surface of either asphalt, concrete or other engineered surface capable of supporting 75,000 pounds and approved by a civil engineer. It shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 12 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum turning rad ius of 40 feet outside, and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet D-1. 110. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS: Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water-based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7. 111. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1. 112. CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY: All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33. Bassalarchitecture.com 4912 Bradford Place, Rocklin, CA 95765 Tel/Fax: (916) 435-0605 Bassal Architecture (916)435-0605 (408)674-2077 August 3, 2023 Community Development Department, Town of Los Gatos 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Re: Letter of Justification for proposed new house at 16220 Harwood Rd, Los Gatos Attn: Planning Staff The following is a general description of the project, identifying the project's compliance to the Single Family Residential guidelines. The property at 16220 Harwood Rd is owned by Majid & Zari Mohazzab that was purchased in October 2000. The property was running as a preschool and was vacated in October 2020. The original property has 34,674 SF with a General Plan Designation of Residential and Zoning Designation of R-1:10. The owners decided to subdivide the property and build three new houses for themselves and their two adult children. The three lot subdivision was approved by the Town of Los Gatos and was recorded with County of Santa Clara on July 27, 2022. This justification letter is for Parcel B. The architectural and civil plans were submitted for the three parcels to the planning department for review and approval. CB EXHIBIT 4 Bassalarchitecture.com 4912 Bradford Place, Rocklin, CA 95765 Tel/Fax: (916) 435-0605 16220 Harwood Rd Page 2 of 6 The existing homes in the immediate surrounding area were built almost 40 years ago. Most of them are two stories, with two or three car garages. Some of the houses have balconies Existing Neighborhood Analysis: Architecture styles vary between Ranch, Mediterranean, Tudor and generic architecture. The roof materials are mostly wood shakes, composition shingles, or concrete tiles. Building sizes range from 2,400 SF to 3,358 SF. With several homes have more than 3000 SF building sizes such as: 101 Almond Blossom Ct 3,358 SF / 102 Almond Blossom Ct, 3227 SF / 107 Sebastian Ct, 3089 SF (Some pictures of existing homes on pages 4, 5 & 6) (Vicinity Map of the subject property) Bassalarchitecture.com 4912 Bradford Place, Rocklin, CA 95765 Tel/Fax: (916) 435-0605 16220 Harwood Rd Page 3 of 6 The proposed house is designed to be compatible with the neighborhood as described in the comment by the Town of Los Gatos Consulting Architect: Proposed House Analysis: “The proposed new house has traditional architectural design, and is well designed to fit into the immediate neighborhood” The proposed home size is within the ranges of the immediate neighborhood, and it doesn’t cause or raise any privacy issues with the neighboring houses. Considering the immediate neighborhood houses were built almost 40 years ago, and several of them have more than 3000 SF building sizes, the proposed the new houses nicely fit with the neighborhood. The proposed roof type is composition shingles. Composition shingles material is light, echo friendly, fire-resistant, wind-resistant, impact-resistant, and fade-resistant. They are preferred for installing solar panels. The house is two stories with 2 car garages, covered patios and balconies. • Parcel B: - Lot area: 10,011 SF. - The proposed building size is 3,100 SF, with 530 SF two-car garage. - Architectural style is Contemporary Mediterranean design with wood trellis over the garage and smooth stucco finish, with earth colors for compatibility with the existing neighboring homes. - Roof slopes is 5:12 similar or shallower then most existing homes in the area - Bassalarchitecture.com 4912 Bradford Place, Rocklin, CA 95765 Tel/Fax: (916) 435-0605 16220 Harwood Rd Page 4of 6 Attached are images of some of the neighborhood homes: 16224 Harwood Rd 16226 Harwood Rd 16226 Harwood Rd (Rear view facing subject property) Bassalarchitecture.com 4912 Bradford Place, Rocklin, CA 95765 Tel/Fax: (916) 435-0605 16220 Harwood Rd Page 5 of 6 188 Belwood Gateway 189 Belwood Gateway 103 Almond Blossom Lane Bassalarchitecture.com 4912 Bradford Place, Rocklin, CA 95765 Tel/Fax: (916) 435-0605 16220 Harwood Rd Page 6 of 6 105 Almond Blossom Lane 107 Sebastian Ct 101 Almond Blossom Ct EXHIBIT 5 This PageIntentionallyLeft Blank July 20, 2022 Ms. Jocelyn Shoopman Community Development Department Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: 16220 Harwood Road: Parcel B Dear Jocelyn: I reviewed the drawings and evaluated the site context. My comments and recommendations are as follows: Neighborhood Context The site is a large parcel located in an established neighborhood with a mix of one-story and two-story homes designed in traditional architectural styles. The site is currently occupied by the now closed Harwood Hills Country School. Photo- graphs of the neighborhood are shown on the following page. EXHIBIT 6 16220 Harwood Road: Parcel B Design Review Comments July 20,2022 Page 2 House immediately across Almond Blossom Lane THE SITE House to the immediate right on Harwood Road House immediately across Almond Blossom Lane Nearby house to the left on Almond Blossom Lane Nearby house across Almond Blossom Lane Nearby house across Almond Blossom Lane House immediately across Harwood Road 16220 Harwood Road: Parcel B Design Review Comments July 20,2022 Page 3 OVERVIEW The two-story home is designed in a traditional architectural style - see proposed elevation illustrations below. PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION PROPOSED LEFT SIDE ELEVATION PROPOSED RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION 16220 Harwood Road: Parcel B Design Review Comments July 20,2022 Page 4 ISSUES AND CONCERNS The proposed house is simple and well designed to fit into the immediate neighborhood. There are just a few issues which are not consistent with the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines including the following: 1. The constraints imposed by the setbacks on this parcel will result in the garage being the most prominent feature of the home relative to the street frontage and the entry drive which would not be consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.4.1. 3.4.1 Limit the prominence of garages • Avoid designs that allow the garage to dominate the street facade. • Set garages back from the front facade. • Recess garage doors as much as possible from the garage facade. • Consider adding trellises with landscaping over garage doors to soften their visual appearance. 16220 Harwood Road: Parcel B Design Review Comments July 20,2022 Page 5 2. The divided lite windows and molding on the front of the house are not carried fully around the other three facades which is not consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.2.2. 3.2.2 Design for architectural integrity • In general, it is best to select a clear and distinctive architectural style rather than utilizing generic design elements or mixing elements from different architectural styles. • Building massing, roof pitches, materials, window types and proportions, design features (e.g., roof dor- mers), and other architectural features should be consistent with the traditions of the selected style. • Carry wall materials, window types and architectural details around all sides of the house. Avoid side and rear elevations that are markedly different from the front elevation. 3. There may be an inconsistency between the window sill and molding height relationship on the front facade - see Parcel A review letter. 4. The second floor balcony off of the Master Bedroom may pose a privacy issue concern with views into the neigh- boring parcels private outdoor spaces. 16220 Harwood Road: Parcel B Design Review Comments July 20,2022 Page 6 5. While well designed with some varying building forms among the three homes on this parcel, they generally have greater visual bulk than other homes across Harwood Road and Almond Blossom Lane. They have the appearance of a project rather than the diverse neighborhood approach underlying the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Add a trellis over the garage consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.4.1 - see examples below. 16220 Harwood Road: Parcel B Design Review Comments July 20,2022 Page 7 2. Eliminate the second floor balcony or as a minimum fill in the balcony railing area with wall on all three exposed sides. 3. Continue the divided lite windows and projecting wall trim around all sides of the house. 4. Utilize true or simulated divided lites to be consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.7.4. - See illustration below. 5. Reevaluate the wall materials for the homes on all three parcels, and consider some additional diversity of materials (e.g., using different materials on at least one of the homes or explore the use of a mix of materials). 16220 Harwood Road: Parcel B Design Review Comments July 20,2022 Page 8 Jocelyn, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are other issues that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry L. Cannon Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Report 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos Los Gatos, CA 95032 Lot B Prepared for: Town of Los Gatos March 10, 2023 Prepared By: EXHIBIT 7 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Table of Content Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................1 Background ............................................................................................................1 Assignment .............................................................................................................1 Limits of the assignment ........................................................................................1 Purpose and use of the report ................................................................................2 Observations .........................................................................................................2 Tree Inventory .........................................................................................................2 Plans .......................................................................................................................2 Analysis .................................................................................................................4 Discussion .............................................................................................................5 Condition Rating .....................................................................................................5 Expected Impact Level ...........................................................................................6 Mitigation for Removals ..........................................................................................7 Tree Protection .......................................................................................................8 Conclusion ............................................................................................................8 Recommendations ...............................................................................................9 Bibliography ........................................................................................................10 Glossary of Terms ...............................................................................................11 Appendix A: Tree Inventory Map and Site Plan ................................................13 A1: Existing and Proposed Site Plan ....................................................................13 A2: Grading and Drainage Plan ............................................................................14 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Appendix B: Tree Inventory and Assessment Tables ......................................15 Appendix C: Photographs ..................................................................................17 C1: Chinese Elms .................................................................................................17 C2: Chinese Elms and Coast Live Oaks ...............................................................18 Appendix D: Tree Protection Guidelines ...........................................................19 D1: Plan Sheet Detail S-X (Type I) ........................................................................19 D2: Plan Sheet Detail S-Y (Type III) ......................................................................20 D3: Section 29.10.1005. - Protection of Trees During Construction ....................21 Tree Protection Zones and Fence Specifications .................................................21 All persons, shall comply with the following precautions .....................................22 Prohibited Activities ..............................................................................................22 Monitoring ............................................................................................................23 Root Pruning .........................................................................................................23 Boring or Tunneling ...............................................................................................23 Tree Pruning and Removal Operations .................................................................23 Appendix E: Tree Protection Signs ....................................................................24 E1: English ............................................................................................................24 E2: Spanish ...........................................................................................................25 Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions ...................................26 Certification of Performance .............................................................................27 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Summary The applicant is requesting approval for construction of a new single-family residence. The inventory contained nineteen (19) trees comprised of ten (10) different species. No trees are considered Large Protected and four (4) are Exempt fruit or nut trees while one is a “Street Tree”. Five trees are in good condition, five fair, four poor, and five very poor. Eight trees will be highly impacted and caused to be removed, although the plans only call out seven. The eighth tree is Chinese elm #293 at the edge of the proposed driveway. Two additional trees could be moderately affected and include Chinese elms (Ulmus parvifolia) #291 and #295. Tree #272 is in poor condition but not expected to be affected, #295 is in poor conditions and expected to be moderately impacted, and #275 is in very poor shape and not expected to be impacted, all threes of these should be considered for removal along with the eight highly impacted. The applicant is required to replace eight protected trees according to the ordinance. The landscape plan does not adequately provide the required replacements and indicates two pittosporum (Pittosporum tenuifolium) and five myrtles (Morella californica) 5 and 10 gallon container size. All the trees to be retained are around the perimeter of the project and fence can be placed at the appropriate distances indicated in Appendix B (considering #275 should also be removed). There were nineteen trees appraised for a rounded depreciated value of $50,490.00. Introduction Background The Town of Los Gatos asked me to assess the site, trees, and proposed footprint plan, and to provide a report with my findings and recommendations to help satisfy planning requirements. Assignment •Provide an arborist’s report including an assessment of the trees within the project area and on the adjacent sites. The assessment is to include the species, size (trunk diameter), condition (health, structure, and form), and suitability for preservation ratings. Affix number tags on the trees for reference on site and on plans. •Provide tree protection specifications, guidelines, and impact ratings for those affected by the project. •Provide appraised values using the Trunk Formula Technique. Limits of the assignment •The information in this report is limited to the condition of the trees during my inspection on March 8, 2023. No tree risk assessments were performed. •Tree heights and canopy diameters are estimates. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 1 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 •The plans reviewed for this assignment were as follows (Table 1) Purpose and use of the report The report is intended to identify all the trees within the plan area that could be affected by a project. The report is to be used by the Town of Los Gatos and the property owners as a reference for existing tree conditions to help satisfy planning requirements. Observations Tree Inventory The inventory consists of trees protected by the Town of Los Gatos located on site and those in close proximity on neighboring properties. Sec. 29.10.0960. - Scope of protected trees. All trees which have a four-inch or greater diameter (twelve and one half-inch circumference) of any trunk, when removal relates to any review for which zoning approval or subdivision approval is required. (Appendix A and B). Los Gatos Town Ordinance 29.10.0970 Exceptions (1) states the following: “A fruit or nut tree that is less than eighteen (18) inches in diameter (fifty-seven-inch circumference). Plans The applicant is reques%ng approval for construc%on of a new single-family residence for Lot B on property zoned R-1:10. APN 567-18-051. Table 1: Plans Reviewed Checklist Plan Date Sheet Reviewed Source Existing Site Topographic 10/27/2022 A1.2 Yes Bassal Architecture Proposed Site Plan 10/27/2022 A1.1 Yes Bassal Architecture Erosion Control 10/12/2022 C-5 Yes SMP Engineers Grading and Drainage 10/12/2022 2 of 5 C-2 Yes SMP Engineers Utility Plan and Hook-up locations No Exterior Elevations 10/27/2022 A3.1 -A3.3 Yes Bassal Architecture Landscape Plan 10/27/2022 L1 Yes Bassal Architecture Irrigation Plan No T-1 Tree Protection Plan No Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 2 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 The inventory contained nineteen (19) trees comprised of ten (10) different species (Chart 1). No trees are considered Large Protected 1 and four (4) are Exempt fruit or nut trees (Chart 1). One tree is a “Street Tree”. 2 Large protected tree means any oak (Quercus spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), or Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) which has a 24-inch or 1 greater diameter (75-inch circumference); or any other species of tree with a 48-inch or greater diameter (150-inch circumference). A fruit or nut tree that is less than eighteen (18) inches in diameter (fifty-seven-inch circumference).2 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 3 27 Quantity 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Analysis Tree appraisal was performed according to the Council of Tree & Landscape Appraisers Guide for Plant Appraisal 10th Edition, 2019 (CLTA) along with Western Chapter International Society of Arboriculture Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004. The trees were appraised using the “Cost Approach” and more specifically the “Trunk Formula Technique” (Appendix B). “Trunk Formula Technique” is calculated as follows: Basic Tree Cost = (Unit tree cost x Appraised trunk area), Appraised Value = (Basic tree cost X functional Limitations (percentage) X Condition (percentage) X External Limitations (percentage)). The trunk formula valuations are based on four tree factors; size (trunk cross sectional area), condition, functional limitations, and external limitations. There are two steps to determine the overall value. The first step is to determine the “Basic Tree Cost” based on size and unit tree cost. Unit tree cost is calculated by dividing the nursery wholesale cost of a 24 inch box specimen and its replacement size (cost per square inch trunk caliper) which is determined by the Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004 Western Chapter Regional Supplement. The cost of the 24 inch box wholesale specimen was determined through personal communications with BrightView and Normans nurseries in Farmington and Central Wholesale in San Jose for an average of $214.00. The second part is to depreciate the tree’s Basic Cost through an assessment of condition, functional limitations, and external limitations. The condition assessment guidelines and percentages are defined in the “Condition Rating” section of this report. Functional limitations are based on factors associated with the tree’s interaction to its planting site that would affect condition, limit development, or reduce the utility in the future and include genetics, placement, and site conditions for the individual tree. External limitations are outside the property, out of control of the owner and also affect condition, limit development, or reduce the utility in the future (i.e power lines, municipal restrictions, drought adaptations, or species susceptibility to pests). There were nineteen trees appraised for a rounded depreciated value of $50,490.00. Appraisal worksheets are available upon request Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 4 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Discussion Condition Rating A tree’s condition is a determination of its overall health, structure, and form. The assessment considered all three criteria for a combined condition rating. •100% - Exceptional = Good health and structure with significant size, location or quality. •61-80% - Good = Normal vigor, well-developed structure, function and aesthetics not compromised with good longevity for the site. •41-60 % - Fair = Reduced vigor, damage, dieback, or pest problems, at least one significant structural problem or multiple moderate defects requiring treatment. Major asymmetry or deviation from the species normal habit, function and aesthetics compromised. •21-40% - Poor = Unhealthy and declining appearance with poor vigor, abnormal foliar color, size or density with potential irreversible decline. One serious structural defect or multiple significant defects that cannot be corrected and failure may occur at any time. Significant asymmetry and compromised aesthetics and intended use. •6-20% - Very Poor = Poor vigor and dying with little foliage in irreversible decline. Severe defects with the likelihood of failure being probable or imminent. Aesthetically poor with little or no function in the landscape. •0-5% - Dead/Unstable = Dead or imminently ready to fail. Five trees are in good condition, five fair, four poor, and five very poor (Chart 2). Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 5 27 Quantity 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Expected Impact Level Impact level defines how a tree may be affected by construction activity and proximity to the tree, and is described as low, moderate, or high. The following scale defines the impact rating: •Low = The construction activity will have little influence on the tree. •Moderate = The construction may cause future health or structural problems, and steps must be taken to protect the tree to reduce future problems. •High = Tree structure and health will be compromised and removal is recommended, or other actions must be taken for the tree to remain. The tree is located in the building envelope. Eight trees will be highly impacted and caused to be removed, although the plans only call out seven. The eighth tree is Chinese elm #293 at the edge of the proposed driveway. Not sure how or why the others are to be removed but this one indicated as a retain. The tree will not survive the construction around it. Two additional trees could be moderately affected and include Chinese elms #291 and #295. Tree #272 is in poor condition but not expected to be affected, #295 is in poor conditions and expected to be moderately impacted, and #275 is in very poor shape and not expected to be impacted, all threes of these should be considered for removal along with the eight highly impacted. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 6 27 Quantity 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Mitigation for Removals The table below indicates the recommended replacement values (Table 2). The applicant is required to replace eight protected trees according to the ordinance. Alternatively it may be possible to create an approved landscape plan or provide an in- lieu payment. The landscape plan does not adequately provide the required replacements and indicates two pittosporum and five myrtles 5 and 10 gallon container size, there is no tabular format indicating the quantity and species, and the species chosen on the plan sheet are all very small growing. 1To measure an asymmetrical canopy of a tree, the widest measurement shall be used to determine canopy size. 2Often, it is not possible to replace a single large, older tree with an equivalent tree(s). In this case, the tree may be replaced with a combination of both the Tree Canopy Replacement Standard and in-lieu payment in an amount set forth by Town Council resolution paid to the Town Tree Replacement Fund. 3Single Family Residential Replacement Option is available for developed single family residential lots under 10,000 square feet that are not subject to the Town’s Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. All 15-gallon trees must be planted on-site. Any in-lieu fees for single family residential shall be based on 24” box tree rates as adopted by Town Council. 4Replacement Trees shall be approved by the Town Arborist and shall be of a species suited to the available planting location, proximity to structures, overhead clearances, soil type, compatibility with surrounding canopy and other relevant factors. Replacement with native species shall be strongly encouraged. Replacement requirements in the Hillsides shall comply with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines Appendix A and Section 29.10.0987 Special Provisions—Hillsides. Table 2: Town of Los Gatos Tree Canopy - Replacement Standard Canopy Size of Removed Tree (1) Replacement Requirement (2)(4) Single Family Residential Replacement Option (3)(4)10 feet or less Two 24 inch box trees Two 15 gallon treesMore than 10 feet to 25 feet Three 24 inch box trees Three 15 gallon treesMore than 25 feet to 40 feet Four 24 inch box trees or two 36 inch box trees Four 15 gallon trees More than 40 feet to 55 feet Six 24 inch box trees; or three 36 inch box trees Not available Greater than 55 feet Ten 24 inch box trees; or five 36 inch box trees Not available Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 7 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Tree Protection Typically there are three different tree protection schemes which are called Type I (Appendix D1), Type II and Type III (Appendix D2) trunk protection only. Tree protection focuses on avoiding damage to the roots, trunk, or scaffold branches (Appendix D). The most current accepted method for determining the TPZ is to use a formula based on species tolerance, tree age/vigor, and trunk diameter (Matheny, N. and Clark, J. 1998) (Fite, K, and Smiley, E. T., 2016). Preventing mechanical damage to the trunk from equipment or hand tools can be accomplished by wrapping the main stem with straw wattle or using vertical timbers (Appendix D). All the trees to be retained are around the perimeter of the project and fence can be placed at the appropriate distances indicated in Appendix B (considering #275 should also be removed). Conclusion The applicant is requesting approval for construction of a new single-family residence. The inventory contained nineteen (19) trees comprised of ten (10) different species. No trees are considered Large Protected and four (4) are Exempt fruit or nut trees while there is one “Street Tree”. Five trees are in good condition, five fair, four poor, and five very poor. Eight trees will be highly impacted and caused to be removed, although the plans only call out seven. The eighth tree is Chinese elm #293 at the edge of the proposed driveway. The tree will not survive the construction around it. Two additional trees could be moderately affected and include Chinese elms #291 and #295. Tree #272 is in poor condition but not expected to be affected, #295 is in poor conditions and expected to be moderately impacted, and #275 is in very poor shape and not expected to be impacted, all threes of these should be considered for removal along with the eight highly impacted. The applicant is required to replace eight protected trees according to the ordinance. The landscape plan does not adequately provide the required replacements and indicates two pittosporum and five myrtles 5 and 10 gallon container size, there is no tabular format indicating the quantity and species, and the species chosen on the plan sheet are all very small growing. All the trees to be retained are around the perimeter of the project and fence can be placed at the appropriate distances indicated in Appendix B (considering #275 should also be removed. There were nineteen trees appraised for a rounded depreciated value of $50,490.00. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 8 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Recommendations 1.Place tree protection fence around the perimeter of the site at the appropriate radius as indicated in Appendix B. 2.Consider removing #293 or reconfiguring the driveway. 3.Provide a replacement landscape plan to account for the eight protected trees. 4.Install temporary irrigation or soaker hoses in all tree protection zones and provide supplemental watering during construction within all TPZ areas. Infrequent deeper watering is preferred. 5.All tree maintenance and care shall be performed by a qualified arborist with a C-61/D-49 California Contractors License. Tree maintenance and care shall be specified in writing according to American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management: Standard Practices parts 1 through 10 and adhere to ANSI Z133.1 safety standards and local regulations. All maintenance is to be performed according to ISA Best Management Practices. 6.Refer to Appendix D for general tree protection guidelines including recommendations for arborist assistance while working under trees, trenching, or excavation within a trees drip line or designated TPZ/CRZ. 7.Place all the tree protection fence locations and guidelines on the plans including the grading, drainage, and utility plans. Create a separate plan sheet that includes all three protection measures labeled “T-1 Tree Protection Plan.” 8.Provide a copy of this report to all contractors and project managers, including the architect, civil engineer, and landscape designer or architect. It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure all parties are familiar with this document. 9.Arrange a pre-construction meeting with the project arborist or landscape architect to verify tree protection is in place, with the correct materials, and at the proper distances. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 9 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Bibliography American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management : Standard Practices (Management of Trees and Shrubs During Site Planning, Site Development, and Construction)(Part 5). Londonderry, NH: Secretariat, Tree Care Industry Association, 2019. Print. Fite, Kelby, and Edgar Thomas. Smiley. Managing trees during construction, second edition. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 2016. ISA. Guide For Plant Appraisal 9th Edition. Savoy, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 2000. Print. ISA. Guide For Plant Appraisal 10th Edition. Savoy, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 2018. Print. ISA. Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004 Western Chapter Regional Supplement. Western Chapter ISA Matheny, Nelda P., Clark, James R. Trees and development: A technical guide to preservation of trees during land development. Bedminster, PA: International Society of Arboriculture 1998. Smiley, E, Matheny, N, Lilly, S, ISA. Best Management Practices: Tree Risk Assessment: International Society of Arboriculture, 2017. Print Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 10 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Glossary of Terms Basic Tree Cost: The cost of replacement for a perfect specimen of a particular species and cross sectional area prior to location and condition depreciation. Cost Approach: An indication of value by adding the land value to the depreciated value of improvements. Defect: An imperfection, weakness, or lack of something necessary. In trees defects are injuries, growth patterns, decay, or other conditions that reduce the tree’s structural strength. Diameter at breast height (DBH): Measures at 1.4 meters (4.5 feet) above ground in the United States, Australia (arboriculture), New Zealand, and when using the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th edition; at 1.3 meters (4.3 feet) above ground in Australia (forestry), Canada, the European Union, and in UK forestry; and at 1.5 meters (5 feet) above ground in UK arboriculture. Drip Line: Imaginary line defined by the branch spread or a single plant or group of plants. The outer extent of the tree crown. Form: describes a plant’s habit, shape or silhouette defined by its genetics, environment, or management. Health: Assessment is based on the overall appearance of the tree, its leaf and twig growth, and the presence and severity of insects or disease. Mechanical damage: Physical damage caused by outside forces such as cutting, chopping or any mechanized device that may strike the tree trunk, roots or branches. Scaffold branches: Permanent or structural branches that for the scaffold architecture or structure of a tree. Straw wattle: also known as straw worms, bio-logs, straw noodles, or straw tubes are man made cylinders of compressed, weed free straw (wheat or rice), 8 to 12 inches in diameter and 20 to 25 feet long. They are encased in jute, nylon, or other photo degradable materials, and have an average weight of 35 pounds. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 11 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Structural evaluation: focused on the crown, trunk, trunk flare, above ground roots and the site conditions contributing to conditions and/or defects that may contribute to failure. Tree Protection Zone (TPZ): Defined area within which certain activities are prohibited or restricted to prevent or minimize potential injury to designated trees, especially during construction or development. Tree Risk Assessment: Process of evaluating what unexpected things could happen, how likely it is, and what the likely outcomes are. In tree management, the systematic process to determine the level of risk posed by a tree, tree part, or group of trees. Trunk: Stem of a tree. Trunk Formula Technique: Method to appraise the monetary value of trees considered too large to be replaced with nursery or field grown stock. Based on developing a representative unit cost for replacement with the same or comparable species of the same size and in the same place, subject to depreciation for various factors. Contrast with replacement cost method. Volunteer: A tree, not planted by human hands, that begins to grow on residential or commercial property. Unlike trees that are brought in and installed on property, volunteer trees usually spring up on their own from seeds placed onto the ground by natural causes or accidental transport by people. Normally, volunteer trees are considered weeds and removed, but many desirable and attractive specimens have gone on to become permanent residents on many public and private grounds. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 12 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Appendix A: Tree Inventory Map and Site Plan A1: Existing and Proposed Site Plan Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 13 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 A2: Grading and Drainage Plan Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 14 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Appendix B: Tree Inventory and Assessment Tables Table 3: Inventory and Assessment Summary Tree Species I.D. #Trunk Diameter (in.) ~ Canopy Diameter (ft.) Condition Expected Impact Protection Status Rounded Depreciated Value Tree Protection Radii (ft.) apple (Malus domestica)270 6, 5 10 Poor High Exempt $1,390.00 5 apricot (Prunus armeniaca)271 10 20 Good Low Exempt $3,670.00 7 Myoporum (Myoporum laetum) 272 10 25 Poor Low Protected $400.00 7 Photinia (Photinia x fraseri)273 8 15 Good Low Protected $3,240.00 5 peach (Prunus persica)274 6 8 Poor High Exempt $730.00 4 Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia) 275 Multi 4 15 Very poor Low Protected $500.00 5 bottle brush (Callistemon viminalis) 276 8 15 Good Low Protected $2,520.00 5 fern pine (Afrocarpus gracilior) 277 12 30 Good Low Protected $3,780.00 8 date palm (Phoenix canariensis) 278 30 25 Good Low Protected $13,900.00 20 apple (Malus domestica)279 4, 3 8 Very poor High Exempt $270.00 3 bottle brush (Callistemon viminalis) 280 Multi 4, 2, 2 12 Fair Low Protected $1,800.00 5 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 15 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 bottle brush (Callistemon viminalis) 281 Multi 4, 2, 2 12 Fair Low Protected $1,800.00 5 Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia) 291 7, 7 30 Fair Moderate Protected $2,620.00 7 Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia) 292 7, 7, 6, 5 30 Fair High Protected $3,780.00 8 Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia) 293 12, 7, 6 30 Fair High Protected $5,900.00 10 coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) 294 16 35 Very poor High Protected $1,530.00 11 Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia) 295 6, 6, 5, 6 25 Poor Moderate Protected $2,270.00 8 coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) 296 2, 2 6 Very poor High Protected $50.00 2 coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) 297 6 10 Very poor High Protected $210.00 4 Tree Species I.D. #Trunk Diameter (in.) ~ Canopy Diameter (ft.) Condition Expected Impact Protection Status Rounded Depreciated Value Tree Protection Radii (ft.) Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 16 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Appendix C: Photographs C1: Chinese Elms Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 17 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 C2: Chinese Elms and Coast Live Oaks Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 18 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Appendix D: Tree Protection Guidelines D1: Plan Sheet Detail S-X (Type I) Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 19 27 TREE PROTECTION Crown drip line or other limit of Tree Protection area. See tree preservation plan for fence alignment.4'-0"Maintain existing grade with the tree protection fence unless otherwise indicated on the plans. 2" x 6' steel posts or approved equal. Tree Protection fence: High density polyethylene fencing with 3.5" x 1.5" openings; Color- orange. Steel posts installed at 8' o.c. 5" thick layer of mulch. Notes: 1- See specifications for additional tree protection requirements. 2- If there is no existing irrigation, see specifications for watering requirements. 3- No pruning shall be performed except by approved arborist. 4- No equipment shall operate inside the protective fencing including during fence installation and removal. 5- See site preparation plan for any modifications with the Tree Protection area. SECTION VIEW KEEP OUT TREE PROTECTION AREA 8.5" x 11" sign laminated in plastic spaced every 50' along the fence. URBAN TREE FOUNDATION © 2014 OPEN SOURCE FREE TO USE Tree protection fence: Fencing shall be comprised of six- foot high chain link mounted on eight- foot tall, 1 7/8-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground. Minimum 4” thick mulch layer Crown diameter drip line distance equal to the outer most limit of foliage.Notes: •All tree maintenance and care shall be performed by a qualified arborist with a C-61/D-49 California Contractors License. Tree maintenance and care shall be specified in writing according to American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management: Standard Practices parts 1 through 10 and adhere to ANSI Z133.1 safety standards and local regulations. •All maintenance is to be performed according to ISA Best Management Practices. Notes: The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) may vary in radius from the trunk and may or may not be established at the drip line distance. See arborist’s report and plan sheet for specifications of TPZ radii.6’-0”Modified by Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC, 2019 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 D2: Plan Sheet Detail S-Y (Type III) Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 20 27EVCHARGINGONLYEVCHARGINGONLYNOPARKINGNOPARKINGCLEAN AIRVAN POOLE.V.CLEAN AIRVAN POOLE.V.CLEAN AIRVAN POOLE.V.327 328 329329327328E1E1E1E5E5AE5CC ?W ?W ?WPLANTING PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATESSEE LIBRARY PLANS GUSHEE STREET PLANTING PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATESSEE LIBRARY PLANSPLANTING PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATESSEE LIBRARY PLANSPARKING AND BUILDING BYTEALL MESSER ARCHITECTSEE LIBRARY PLANSPLANTING PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATESSEE LIBRARY PLANSLIBRARY LANDSCAPE PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATES L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.BULL CREEK FLOWLINEFUTURELIBRARY XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X KIRBY STREETXXXSEE L2.0 MATERIALS PLAN FOR DISCOVERY PARKIMPROVEMENTSSEE L2.0 MATERIALS PLAN FOR DISCOVERY PARKIMPROVEMENTS (E) CHAINLINK FENCE AND GATE TO REMAIN APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF WORK (L.O.W.)LEGEND (E) TREE TO BE PROTECTED(E) TREE TO REMAINNOTE:1.SEE C3.0 EROSION CONTROL PLAN FOR TREEPROTECTION IN EXISTING RIPARIAN AREA.2.TREE SURVEY PROVIDED BY IFLAND SURVEY, 10/09/18.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL TREES WHICH ARELOCATED WITHIN 10' OF EQUIPMENT MOVEMENT.1L1.0(E) FENCE TO BE REMOVEDARBORIST NOTES:1.ALL TREE MAINTENANCE AND CARE SHALL BEPERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED ARBORIST WITH AC-61/D-49 CALIFORNIA CONTRACTORS LICENSE. TREEMAINTENANCE AND CARE SHALL BE SPECIFIED INWRITING ACCORDING TO AMERICAN NATIONALSTANDARD FOR TREE CARE OPERATIONS: TREE, SHRUBAND OTHER WOODY PLANT MANAGEMENT: STANDARDPRACTICES PARTS 1 THROUGH 10 AND ADHERE TO ANSIZ133.1 SAFETY STANDARDS AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.ALL MAINTENANCE IS TO BE PERFORMED ACCORDING TO ISA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. 2.TREE PRUNING - IF TREE PRUNING FOR OVERHEAD CLEARANCE IS REQUIRED OR NECESSARY PRUNING SPECIFICATIONS SHALL BE IN WRITING PRIOR TO ANY CUTTING. CUTTING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED TREE CARE PROFESSIONAL OR SUPERVISED BY THE PROJECT ARBORIST. NO LIMBS GREATER THAN FOUR INCHES (4”) IN DIAMETER SHALL BE REMOVED WITHOUT APPROVAL. 3.ROOT MANAGEMENT - PRIOR TO REMOVING ROOTS GREATER THAN TWO INCHES (2”) IN DIAMETER EACH TREE SHALL BE EVALUATED BY THE PROJECT ARBORIST TO HELP DETERMINE ITS LIKELIHOOD OF FAILURE AFTER ROOT LOSS. IF ROOTS OVER TWO INCHES IN DIAMETER ARE ENCOUNTERED THEY SHOULD BE PRUNED BY HAND WITH LOPPERS, HANDSAW, RECIPROCATING SAW, OR CHAIN SAW RATHER THAN LEFT CRUSHED OR TORN. ROOTS SHOULD BE CUT BEYOND SINKER ROOTS OR OUTSIDE ROOT BRANCH JUNCTIONS AND BE SUPERVISED BY THE PROJECT ARBORIST. WHEN COMPLETED, EXPOSED ROOTS SHOULD BE KEPT MOIST WITH BURLAP OR BACKFILLED WITHIN ONE HOUR. NO ROOTS SHALL BE CUT WITHIN SIX TIMES THE TRUNK DIAMETER DISTANCE IN FEET ON ONE SIDE WITHOUT ARBORIST APPROVAL. 4.TRUNK PROTECTION - PREVENTING MECHANICAL DAMAGE TO THE MAIN STEMS FROM EQUIPMENT OR HAND TOOLS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED BY WRAPPING THE MAIN STEM WITH STRAW WATTLE. 5.SITE OCCUPANCY - HAVE A QUALIFIED ARBORIST PERFORM A LEVEL 2: BASIC TREE RISK ASSESSMENT AS DESCRIBED IN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES: TREE RISK ASSESSMENT: INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE, 2017 TO HELP IDENTIFY ANY NEW RISK FACTORS AFTER CONSTRUCTION UPON NEW SITE OCCUPANCY. DEMOLITION AND TREE PROTECTION PLAN L1.0 1"= 20' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTBASE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREPROJECT TEAMPROJECT NAME & ADDRESSFELTON LIBRARYDISCOVERY PARKGUSHEE STREETFELTON, CA, 95018REVISION#Date Description STAMP SHEET TITLE Scale: Date: Drawn by: Checked by: Project No.: PHASE BID SET No. 5579 Ren. 9/30/2020LICENSED A R CHI TECTST A TEOF CA L IF O RNIAAL E N DA CS P 1802 PA / AS NM 04/19/2019 CIVIL ENGINEERMME CIVIL + STRUCTURAL ENGINEERINGSAN FRANCISCO / PORTLANDwww.baselandscape.comIRRIGATION DESIGNRMA IRRIGATIONCLIENTSANTA CRUZ COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS,OPEN SPACE, AND CULTURAL SERVICES 0 feet40 1" = 20' 20 60 80 NORTHSECTION TREE TRUNK 12" Ø STRAW FILLED BURLAP WATTLES TREE PROTECTION WITHOUT FENCE 3/8" = 1'-0"4'-0"ROOT PROTECTION ZONE. SEE SPECS FOR REQUIREMENTS 1 SCHEDULE TREES TO BE PROTECTED: 20 TREES TO BE REMOVED: 0 04-19-20191 Planning Review Comments1 SECTION VIEW TRUNK PROTECTION WITH WATTLES-Y 6’-0” Excavation Trenches: 1. When any roots are cut or torn during construction, it is critical that you sharply cut all the ends of any exposed roots immediately. Failure to do so will leave crushed and torn roots. This leads to decay and inhibits growth of new roots. 2. Pile soil on the side of the trench opposite the tree. If this is not possible, place the soil on a plastic tarp, plywood or a thick bed of mulch. 3. Do not compact the backfill on the trench more than its original firmness. 4. Water the backfill to allow the roots to begin healing. Trenching near a tree can kill as much as 40%-50% of the tree’s roots. If the tree you are working around is in a confined space and your equipment will be coming close, it is important for you to protect the trunk. Wrap the tree trunk in old tires or place 2” x 4” studs around the tree and rope or band them together. ROOT PRUNING DETAIL PLEASE KEEP THIS SHEET FOR REFERENCE 2” x 4” or 2” x 2” Dimensional Lumber Sturdy Strap (steel, nylon, or synthetic rope) 2” x 4” ’or 2” x 2” - 6 to 8 Feet Tall Dimensional Lumber Spaced 3” Apart Sturdy Strap (steel, nylon, or synthetic rope) Bridge With 4” - 6” Deep Course Woody Debris or 4” x 4” Dimensional Lumber and 3/4” Plywood or Steel Road Plate. Note: See Local Ordinance Requirements and Arborist’s Report for Additional Protection Specifications and Guidelines. Trunk Protection Vertical Timber Detail 6’ MIN. 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 D3: Section 29.10.1005. - Protection of Trees During Construction Tree Protection Zones and Fence Specifications 1.Size and materials: Six (6) foot high chain link fencing, mounted on two-inch diameter galvanized iron posts, shall be driven into the ground to a depth of at least two (2) feet at no more than ten-foot spacing. For paving area that will not be demolished and when stipulated in a tree preservation plan, posts may be supported by a concrete base. 2.Area type to be fenced: Type I: Enclosure with chain link fencing of either the entire dripline area or at the tree protection zone (TPZ), when specified by a certified or consulting arborist. Type II: Enclosure for street trees located in a planter strip: chain link fence around the entire planter strip to the outer branches. Type III: Protection for a tree located in a small planter cutout only (such as downtown): orange plastic fencing shall be wrapped around the trunk from the ground to the first branch with two-inch wooden boards bound securely on the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches. 3.Duration of Type I, II, III fencing: Fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction permits are issued and remain in place until the work is completed. Contractor shall first obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to removing a tree protection fence. 4.Warning Sign: Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an eight and one-half-inch by eleven-inch sign stating: "Warning —Tree Protection Zone—This fence shall not be removed and is subject to penalty according to Town Code 29.10.1025.” Text on the signs should be in both English and Spanish (Appendix E). Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 21 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 All persons, shall comply with the following precautions 1.Prior to the commencement of construction, install the fence at the dripline, or tree protection zone (TPZ) when specified in an approved arborist report, around any tree and/or vegetation to be retained which could be affected by the construction and prohibit any storage of construction materials or other materials, equipment cleaning, or parking of vehicles within the TPZ. The dripline shall not be altered in any way so as to increase the encroachment of the construction. 2.Prohibit all construction activities within the TPZ, including but not limited to: excavation, grading, drainage and leveling within the dripline of the tree unless approved by the Director. 3.Prohibit disposal or depositing of oil, gasoline, chemicals or other harmful materials within the dripline of or in drainage channels, swales or areas that may lead to the dripline of a protected tree. 4.Prohibit the attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree. 5.Design utility services and irrigation lines to be located outside of the dripline when feasible. 6.Retain the services of a certified or consulting arborist who shall serve as the project arborist for periodic monitoring of the project site and the health of those trees to be preserved. The project arborist shall be present whenever activities occur which may pose a potential threat to the health of the trees to be preserved and shall document all site visits. 7.The Director and project arborist shall be notified of any damage that occurs to a protected tree during construction so that proper treatment may be administered. Prohibited Activities The following are prohibited activities within the TPZ: •Grade changes (e.g. soil cuts, fills); •Trenches; •Root cuts; •Pedestrian and equipment traffic that could compact the soil or physically damage roots; •Parking vehicles or equipment; •Burning of brush and woody debris; •Storing soil, construction materials, petroleum products, water, or building refuse; and, •Disposing of wash water, fuel or other potentially damaging liquids. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 22 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Monitoring Any trenching, construction or demolition that is expected to damage or encounter tree roots should be monitored by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist and should be documented. The site should be evaluated by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist after construction is complete, and any necessary remedial work that needs to be performed should be noted. Root Pruning Roots greater than two inches in diameter shall not be cut. When roots over two inches in diameter are encountered and are authorized to be cut or removed, they should be pruned by hand with loppers, handsaw, reciprocating saw, or chain saw rather than left crushed or torn. Roots should be cut beyond sinker roots or outside root branch junctions and be supervised by the project arborist. When completed, exposed roots should be kept moist with burlap or backfilled within one hour. Boring or Tunneling Boring machines should be set up outside the drip line or established Tree Protection Zone. Boring may also be performed by digging a trench on both sides of the tree until roots one inch in diameter are encountered and then hand dug or excavated with an Air Spade® or similar air or water excavation tool. Bore holes should be adjacent to the trunk and never go directly under the main stem to avoid oblique (heart) roots. Bore holes should be a minimum of three feet deep. Tree Pruning and Removal Operations All tree pruning or removals should be performed by a qualified arborist with a C-61/D-49 California Contractors License. Treatment, including pruning, shall be specified in writing according to the most recent ANSI A-300A Standards and Limitations and performed according to ISA Best Management Practices while adhering to ANSI Z133.1 safety standards. Trees that need to be removed or pruned should be identified in the pre-construction walk through. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 23 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Appendix E: Tree Protection Signs E1: English Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 24 27 Warning Tree Protection Zone This Fence Shall Not Be Removed And Is Subject To Penalty According To Town Code 29.10.1025 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 E2: Spanish Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 25 27 Cuidado Zona De Arbol Pretejido Esta valla no podrán ser sacados Y está sujeta a sanción en función de Código Ciudad del 29.101025 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any titles or ownership of properties are assumed to be good and marketable. All property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management. All property is presumed to be in conformance with applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or other regulations. Care has been taken to obtain information from reliable sources. However, the consultant cannot be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or attend meetings, hearings, conferences, mediations, arbitration, or trials by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services. This report and any appraisal value expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant, and the consultant’s fee is not contingent upon the reporting of a specified appraisal value, a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event. Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report are intended for use as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale, and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. The reproduction of information generated by architects, engineers, or other consultants on any sketches, drawings, or photographs is only for coordination and ease of reference. Inclusion of said information with any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation as to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information. Unless otherwise expressed: a) this report covers only examined items and their condition at the time of inspection; and b) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that structural problems or deficiencies of plants or property may not arise in the future. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 26 27 16220 Harwood Road, Los Gatos (Lot B)Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report March 10, 2023 Certification of Performance I Richard Gessner, Certify: That I have personally inspected the tree(s) and/or the property referred to in this report, and have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation and/or appraisal is stated in the attached report and Terms of Assignment; That I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own; That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted Arboricultural practices; That no one provided significant professional assistance to the consultant, except as indicated within the report. That my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party, nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any other subsequent events; I further certify that I am a Registered Consulting Arborist® with the American Society of Consulting Arborists, and that I acknowledge, accept and adhere to the ASCA Standards of Professional Practice. I am an International Society of Arboriculture Board Certified Master Arborist®. I have been involved with the practice of Arboriculture and the care and study of trees since 1998. Richard J. Gessner ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist® #496 ISA Board Certified Master Arborist® WE-4341B Copyright © Copyright 2023, Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC. Other than specific exception granted for copies made by the client for the express uses stated in this report, no parts of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording, or otherwise without the express, written permission of the author. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 27 27 EXHIBIT 8 Neighbors meeting information Page 2 Comment Rental Rental Rental 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 JULY 11, 2023 The Development Review Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a regular meeting on July 11, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. ROLL CALL Present: Jennifer Armer, CDD Planning; Robert Gray, CDD Building; Corvell Sparks, PPW Engineering; and Kenny Ip, SCCFD. Absent: None. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 10:00 AM VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS -None. CONSENT ITEMS 1.Approval of Minutes – June 27, 2023 MOTION: Motion by Robert Gray to approve the consent calendar. Seconded by Kenny Ip. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.16220 Harwood Road Architecture and Site Application S-22-034, S-22-035, and S-22-036 Requesting Approval for Construction of a New Single-Family Residence on Lots A, B, and C on Property Zoned R-1:10. APNs 567-18-075, -076, and -077. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction. PROPERTY OWNER: Majid Mohazzab APPLICANT: Cherine Bassal PROJECT PLANNER: Jocelyn Shoopman The project planner presented the staff report. EXHIBIT 9 PAGE 2 OF 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES OF JULY 11, 2023 N:\DEV\DRC\MINUTES\Min 2023\07-11-23 Minutes - DRC.docx Opened Public Comment. Jennifer Armer, Planning Manager Because this hearing deals with 3 separate homes, the speaking times will be extended to ten minutes for opening comments by the applicant, five minutes for each member of the public, and five minutes for closing comment by the applicant. Majid Mohazzab, Applicant/Owner These comments are based on a submitted letter of justification. We bought the property in 2000 with the intention to build three new houses for family members. The school tenant at the time asked to continue running a school in the location. Later the school use was transferred to the director of the school, but they got behind in rent and closed. A new tenant moved in, but even with a reduction in rent during Covid, the decided to close the school. We have worked with our architect, the Town’s Consulting Architect, and the Town to create a development that is compatible with the neighborhood and environment. Homes in the surrounding neighborhood are approximately 40 years old. The neighborhood style is mainly ranch or Tudor. Nearby home sizes range from 2,400 to 3,358 square feet with two or three car garages and are one- or two-stories. The proposed homes are within that range and compatible with the neighborhood. George, Applicant’s Son-in-law Majid is a good community member. He was very thoughtful of his tenants. For the past 10 years he made sure the property was updated and cared for. During Covid the school use encountered many issues. The homes are for Majid’s family. The proposal follows Town regulations. Majid has gone out to a few neighbors to keep them informed and to make sure that the plans fit the neighborhood. Doug, Neighbor at 16224 Harwood Road In my opinion this project disregards the scale, architecture, and character of the Belgatos neighborhood and its unique natural hillside setting. The project is by a private owner, but because all three homes are of the same style and built at the same time, it should be considered a development built for long term profitability. We subdivided our land in the 1980’s. The school next door was single-story with limited hours. Approximately 50 percent of our property line is shared with Lot B. Concerned about the size and lack of setbacks of Lots A and C. The Residential Design Guidelines describe Belgatos as a natural neighborhood close to the hills with unique characteristics. This project minimized the side and back yards to maximize the home size. The other comparable homes are not flag lots and face a street. The proposed house faces the back of our house. Privacy will now be compromised. Our house will have a driveway on both sides. Concerned about construction traffic. Each home has a junior Accessory Dwelling Unit that will need parking and increase traffic. The location of the home on Lot A will block visibility for pedestrian safety at that corner. PAGE 3 OF 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES OF JULY 11, 2023 N:\DEV\DRC\MINUTES\Min 2023\07-11-23 Minutes - DRC.docx Nancy Durett, Property Owner of 16224 Harwood Road Live with my daughter, son-in-law, and two grandchildren. The main problem is that the flag lot is 15 feet from the backline of our home. It will see into our backyard. The house behind is also very close. A new two-story home would see into the main bedroom of the neighbor’s home below. The applicant has spoken with us. We request that the Lot B house should be at least a single story. The privacy of the five surrounding houses will be impacted. Applicant has the right to develop, but concerned about privacy. Harwood Road and Almond Blossom Court is a very busy corner with cars running through the stop sign. Sally Jones, Neighbor at 105 Almond Blossom Court Concerned that a two-story home will block my view. Another house had moved behind our house and looks directly into our backyard. She and her husband were given an exemption to build a higher fence for privacy. Looking at the orange netting she is concerned about privacy and prefers a single-story design. Majid Mohazzab, Applicant/Owner The prior school use created more traffic than the proposed residential use. The house at 16224 is 3,000 square feet and is 30 feet in height, while the proposed homes are only 28 feet tall. The houses to the rear have a grade that is four feet higher than the proposed project. Privacy trees will be added to each parcel. The design for each lot complies with the Town’s setback regulations. The design of each home is compatible with the square footages of the immediate neighborhood. Committee asked questions of the owner. Closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. Opened Public Comment for a specific question to the applicant. Staff: Jennifer Armer, Planning Manager Are you willing to make changes to include lattice screening on the balconies, plant trees, and raise sill height of rear facing windows to address privacy concerns? Majid Mohazzab, Applicant/Owner Yes. Closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. PAGE 4 OF 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES OF JULY 11, 2023 N:\DEV\DRC\MINUTES\Min 2023\07-11-23 Minutes - DRC.docx MOTION: Motion by Robert Gray to approve Lot A with required findings and recommended conditions of approval. Seconded by Kenny Ip. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 4-0. Appeal rights were recited. MOTION: Motion by Jennifer Armer to approve Lots B and C with required findings and recommended conditions of approval with the following additional condition. To the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, the following three items will be included to address privacy concerns: planting of trees, adding lattice to the second-floor balcony, and incorporating clerestory windows for second floor windows facing the properties concerned when not required for egress. Seconded by Robert Gray. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 4-0. Appeal rights were recited. OTHER BUSINESS None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned 10:58 a.m. This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the July 11, 2023, meeting as approved by the Development Review Committee. Prepared by: ________________________________________ /s/ Jennifer Armer, AICP, Planning Manager This Page Intentionally Left Blank Key Points for Planning Commission – Thank you for taking the time to consider our input on the development proposed for 16220 Harwood road. - During the DRC meeting on 7/11, the three developments were treated as a single application. While some additional time was allowed beyond the standard 3 minutes, this format did not allow for the community to properly comment and provide input on all 3 properties. Instead we were limited to more general comments that applied to all three. For the appeal this changed and they are being treated as 3 individual applications, and it would be worthwhile to understand why. For this reason we have appealed the property that impacts us the most, Lot B or the flag lot. There are aspects to Lot B I outline below which are also shared with Lot A and C, and these will be pointed out when applicable. - During the DRC meeting the community brought up a question as to why the houses were not considered as single story. The DRC response was that there would need to be single story homes in the area to compare to and it appears the thought was there were none. On the contrary there is a single story home sharing fence line with Lot B. In addition approximately 40% of Belwood/Belgatos are single story residences. One of these properties should be a single story in keeping with the ratio of homes in the neighborhood. Lot B being the most constrained would make sense as a single story home as this could address majority of the privacy concerns raised by neighbors. With 40% lot coverage the house would be sizeable and still include a JADU to address housing crisis. -Lot B is the only flag lot in the Belwood/Belgatos neighborhood. It is unique and constrained by its location between the backyards of 7 homes. All other properties in the neighborhood have the luxury of a minimum front setback of 25’ per code, plus a street between it and the adjacent property. Lot B is being allowed at the minimum 25’ setback with NO ADDITIONAL setback provided by a sidewalk or street. The structure on Lot B is directly behind our home and others, and all 2nd story windows and the balcony will greatly impact privacy. -While town code and state ordinances allow for the JADU to be permitted separately, it is illogical to not consider the ENTIRE STRUCTURE size when applying the Los Gatos Residential Design Guidelines. To ignore that Lot B is 3600 sqft of living space in a neighborhood that ranges from 1400 sqft homes to 3300 sqft homes does a disservice to the community and goes against the purpose of the design guidelines you publish. o Note that the existing 3300sqft home and similar sized homes in Belwood/Belgatos R1- 10 zone are corner lots with significant setback between neighbors, not constrained flag lots that present significant privacy issues. -The town is allowing the 3rd largest structure (living space sqft) on the most constrained lot in the neighborhood. It’s worth noting that the other two larger structures are within this development, on Lots A and Lots C both at a staggering 3863 sqft of living space. - What you will not see during your site visit are the two 3863 sqft structures that the story poles have been removed and how overpowering the three largest structures using minimal setbacks in the R1-10 neighborhood truly are. It will be difficult to understand how this group of homes has impacted privacy and obstructed views from all sides of the development. o Homes on the north side of the development have lost views of the west foothills. EXHIBIT 11 o Homes on the south side of the development have lost views of the east hills due to the size of these structures. - The community is concerned that by ignoring the total size of the structures being proposed, the town is setting a precedence for future developers to destroy the natural setting of the Belwood/Belgatos neighborhood. - I understand that the structure is being built to code however what must be considered by the Planning Commission is the constrained, unique flag lot, lack of additional setback of a street, and the total size of the structure(s) being proposed. o If code is all that matters, what is the purpose of the design guideline published by Los Gatos. The structure on Lot B is 3600 sqft of living space. It is the 3rd larged R1-10 property in the neighborhood. It is on the most constrained lot in the neighborhood with no additional setback of a street. It sets a precedent for over-development of our beautiful hillside community. It along with what has been approved for Lot A and C, does not fit within the neighborhood. o The goal of additional affordable housing is still achieved if a single story home with a JADU were proposed. o The neighbors do not believe the proposed solution of lattice and trees will mitigate the privacy issues due to the sheer size of the structure and use of minimum setbacks on all sides. Attached on subsequent pages you will find pictures from our property and 2nd floor as well as the two neighbors with which we share a common drive with. Thank you, Doug and Pam McCracken 16224 Harwood Road 8/11/23 Document is 13 pages total. Supporting Photos: 16224 Harwood road, Lost privacy and obstructed views from 2nd story windows (bedrooms and bathrooms) View from 2nd floor kids bedroom, looking at Lot B front yard and front of proposed structure. Lot B home has large window at stairs as well as 2nd floor windows with unobstructed views of all rooms on our 2nd floor. Quite literally Lot B is a home dropped in directly behind ours. 16224 Harwood Rd View from kids bathroom looking directly at Lot B front yard, front door, and garage door. Entire front yard of Lot B has direct line of site to our bedroom and bathroom windows. 16224 Harwood Road - 2nd floor master bedroom view of Lot B property. Direct line of site from Lot B: front yard, all upper windows, large window at stairs, and 2nd floor balcony. Also visible are lost views of east hills behind 2nd floor structure of Lot B. 16224 Harwood road – privacy issues with backyard, patio, spa. Backyard patio/spa loses all privacy to Lot B. Lot C balcony has line of site view to full backyard and 2nd story windows of our house. Every time the Lot B residents arrive or leave their home they will have a great view of our backyard and windows. - I recommend any impact to the fence and/or retaining wall on our shared property be required to be replaced with the maximum permitted height of 8 foot (full board, no lattice). 16226 Harwood road – Images from 2nd floor master bedroom. Lot B 2nd floor balcony overlooks neighboring yard (pool) and has direct line of site to master bedroom windows. 16226 Harwood road – Images from 2nd floor balcony. Note that Lot B house is only 15’ from shared fenceline, resulting in 2nd floor balcony having fantastic downward view of neighboring pool and yard. 16226 Harwood road – Images from 2nd floor balcony, direct view to 2nd floor balcony of Lot B 16228 Harwood Rd – View of Lot B from 2nd floor bedroom and walkway. This neighbor has more separation from our shared drive, however also loses the best views of the east hills that were visible over the existing homes. 16228 Harwood Rd – View of Lot B from 2nd floor bedroom and walkway 16228 Harwood Rd – View of Lot B from 2nd floor bedroom and walkway General Photos Lot A – respect Harwood easement and minimum required setback of fences from sidewalks to reduce impact of lost visibility around Harwood/Almond Blossom intersection. This intersection is busy with foot traffic and has been an ongoing issue with drivers not stopping or slowing for the stop signs. This Page Intentionally Left Blank Aug 14, 2023 Town of Los Gatos 101 East Main St. Los Gatos, CA 95030 Re: Response to the appeal from the appellants (Doug and Pam McCracken) for 16220 Harwood Rd (proposal for the new house on parcel B) Dear Commissioners, 1. I met Mr. McCracken in front of his house on 10/09/22 and other neighbors more than 9 months ago. I talked to Mr. McCracken about the three new houses and asked him to let me know if he has any issues or concerns but he never contacted me. After that I saw him a couple of times, but he didn’t raise any issue. 2. The night before the DRC meeting, one of neighbors from Belowood/Belgatos mentioned that one of the neighbors posted comments on the website Nextdoor. I checked the site, and saw the comments were from Mr. McCracken. For your refence I added a couple of his comments on page 6. Most of these comments were incorrect, and I am concerned that these comments were misleading to get support from neighbors. His post suggested that the new buildings should be 2,500 sq ft, and that there is no house more than 3,000 sq ft in the neighborhood. However, his house was built almost 40 years ago and the size of his house is almost 3,000 sq ft. Contrary to his comments, there are several houses in the neighborhood that are close or more than 3,000 sq ft in size, including the following 1 EXHIBIT 12 a. 16224 Harwood Rd, 2,925 sq ft b. 101 Almond Blossom Ct 3,358 sq ft c. 102 Almond Blossom Ct 3227 sq ft d. 104 Almond Blossom Ct 2,923 sq ft e. 105 Almond Blossom Ct 2,923 sq ft f. 106 Almond Blossom Ct 3,100 sq ft g. 107 Sebastian Ct, 3089 sq ft h. 102 Sebastian Ct 2,989 sq ft 3. Regarding the appellants' argument that the square footage of the ADU should be considered, based on approved California law, each house (existing or new house) has the right to add an ADU to his/her own property. The application process for ADUs only goes through the building department, and can be added anytime. The square footage of the ADU is not additive to the sq ft of the house during the planning process. 4. The appellants also mentioned several times about changing setbacks for the new house. The appellants want the Town of Los Gatos to violate the California Housing Law and its own Residential guidelines, because they are not happy with the proposed new house on lot B. 5. The appellants are suggesting the proposed new house on parcel B should be a one-story house, even though their two-story house was built with the maximum height and size, and has several windows overlooking parcel B, and other neighboring residences. Please see the picture on page 7 that shows the proposed new house is within the height range of the houses in the neighborhood. Almost all houses around parcel B, including the appellants’ house are two stories. In fact, the appellants’ house is the tallest house (30 feet) in the neighborhood. Please see the picture on page 8 that shows the height of the appellants’ house compared to the story pole orange line on parcel B. 2 6. The appellants argue that the proposed new house is the only flag lot in the Belwood/Belgatos neighborhood. However, the house to next to their house (16226 Harwood Rd) is on a flag lot. Please see the picture on page 9. In fact, the house that they are living in is located on a smaller lot that was subdivided many years ago with three two story buildings that are facing each other and share the same driveway. In contrast, the proposed new home for parcel B has its own private drive. 7. Regarding the privacy and view, the neighborhood is on R1:10 zoning and on a flat area. The view of houses is mostly limited to their adjacent houses. Please see picture 10 that shows the appellants’ house and the houses next to it. Additionally, please see the picture on page 11 which shows the windows of the appellants’ house are overlooking parcel B. 8. The appellants in their appeal letter show several pictures from the left window of their second story room (page 4 & 5 of their letter). The orange (roof) lines of the proposed new home on parcel B are much lower than their house and mostly to the left. Furthermore, there are two existing two-story homes, both to the left and right of picture on Almond Blossom CT. On the left is the two-story building (102 Almond Blossom CT), and on the right-hand side of the appellants’ house, the picture shows the view of the two-story building (105 Almond Blossom Ct). 9. Furthermore, the second-floor windows of the proposed new house are to the left of the appellants’ house, and there is no direct window and view to the appellants’ house. In fact, the windows on the second floor are 60 feet away from their backyard, and 90 feet away from their building. Please see the front view elevation on page 12, and the site plan on page 12. Additionally, please see the pictures on page 14, which shows that most of the proposed new house is located to the left of the appellants’ house. 3 10. The appellants claim they are raising their concerns on behalf of the community and other neighbors. But so far, I have only heard from the appellants who have been raising these issues. 11. The appellants showed several pictures from the houses at16226 Harwood Rd and 16228 Harwood Rd. I haven’t heard any issues or concerns from these owners. The house at 16226 Harwood Rd has a balcony that is facing parcel B. Please see the picture on page 15 which, shows the view of the balcony from parcel B, and how the tree can provide privacy. 12. If the appellants are really concerned about privacy, adding trees can provide enough privacy. The pictures on 14, and 15 show just how by adding trees how much privacy is provided. As shown on the landscaping plan on page 13, the proposed new house will have several trees planted that will provide this additional privacy. 13. The appellants express concern for traffic on the corner of Harwood and Almond Blossom. The property at 16220 Harwood Road, was running as a preschool with the capacity of more than 80 students, plus staff, so there was much more traffic before. This was reviewed and cleared by staff. 14. In conclusion, the appellants are suggesting that the Town of Los Gatos ignore their residential guidelines, and the California Housing law regarding ADUs. They came up with their own rules for deciding if a house should be a single story or two story, but their rules are not based in California Housed Law, or Los Gatos Housing Design Guidelines. They are complaining about privacy, even though there is no privacy issue, and if there is any it can easily be remedied by adding trees. They are complaining about the view, even though their house is taller than the proposed new house, and overlooking their neighbors’ yards. 15. For the proposed new house, I worked more than two years with three different architects to come up with the final designs. I collaborated for more than a year with the planning, engineering, building department and consultant architect, and 4 incorporated their comments. The proposed new house is designed to be compatible with the neighborhood as described in the comment by the Town of Los Gatos Consulting Architect: “ the proposed new house has traditional architectural design, and is well designed to fit into the immediate neighborhood ” Sincerely, Majid and Zari Mohazzab Document is 15 pages total. 16224 Harwood heightCompare to the Proposnho 5 Some of the comments from Appellant on the Nextdoor site 6 STREETSCAPE Size of the proposed new Home on Parcel B compare to other houses in neighborhood The appellant house (16224 Hrawood) is the tallest home 7 The Height of appellant house compared to the proposed new house (the orange line) 8 Adjacent Neighbor houses (house 16226 is on a flag lot just as the proposed new Home) 9 Adjacent Houses next to the Appellant House (All two-stories homes) 10 Windows of the appellant Home Overlooking parcel B (Proposed new home) 11 Front View Elevation of the proposed new house Site Plan 12 Landscaping Plan (Several trees will be planted along the fences) 13 Most of the proposed new house is on the left side of the appellant house (view is from parcel B). Existing tree provide privacy. 5 more trees will be planted along the fence. 14 View of the house 16226 Harwood Rd from parcel B (Existing tree provides privacy. 6 new trees will be planted along the fence) 15 This Page Intentionally Left Blank EXHIBIT 13 ALL NEW, RELOCATED, OR TEMPORARILY REMOVED UTILITY SERVICES, INCLUDING TELEPHONE, ELECTRIC POWER AND ALL OTHER COMMUNICATIONS LINES SHALL BE INSTALLED UNDERGROUND. SLOPE DENSITY = 0.796 = 6.32% 0.0023 x 1 x 2188 PARCEL A PARCEL C PARCEL B SMP ENGINEERS SMP ENGINEERS SECTION Z-Z Z SECTION W-W W PLAN W Z ELEVATION VIEW · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · SMP ENGINEERS · · mo ailure · · · · · · · · · · · SMP ENGINEERS PLAN VIEW SECTION A - A STORM INLET SEDIMENT TRAP-FIBER ROLLS CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA SITE PLAN 1"=20' EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES AND MEASURES EXISTING DRAINAGE INLET PROTECTION PLAN STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE FIBER ROLL NOTES FIBER ROLL (TO BE MAINTAINED) Maintenance PLAN PROFILE SECTION B-B TEMPORARY COVER ON STOCK PILE PERSPECTIVE From: Linda Higgins <> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 10:58 AM To: Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Concern I am very concerned about the proposed monstrosities (houses) at the corner of Harwood and Almond Blossom. The houses are too big for this neighborhood and I can’t imagine how the people will feel whose homes are adjacent to them. Won’t they be peeking into their yards and windows!? This is a nice neighborhood and homes that huge will be magnets for too many people per home and I believe it’s just wrong! Can this please be revisited??? Thank you! Linda Higgins Sent from my iPhone EXHIBIT 14 From: NANCY MCCRACKEN <> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 10:57 AM To : Jocelyn Shoopman <jshoopman@losgatosca.gov> Subject: New build 16220 Harwood Rd Mr. Shoopman, I'm wri�ng this leter to request considera�on of the new build at 16220 Harwood Rd. Los Gatos and it's proposed structure. Including the ADU the square footage is 3600 sq �. (3100 sq, � home with 500 sq � ADU). Much larger than the average Bel Gatos neighborhood home. The layout of the home has a second story balcony facing the back yard (bedrooms/bathrooms) of the home at Harwood invading privacy of the exis�ng home. It's a shame to see monstrous homes - lot line to lot line - being crammed on to small lots and not considering exis�ng neighbors. Please reevaluate. Regards, Nancy McCracken From: larrym1491@aol.com <> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 10:56 AM To: Jocelyn Shoopman <jshoopman@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Concern about new house at 16220 Harwood Rd. There is a proposal to build three large two-story houses on the corner of Harwood Rd. and Almond Blossom Ln. Unfortunately, the current plan has a driveway off Harwood for access to the back house, 16220 Harwood Rd., lot B. This house is two stories with a balcony on the South side, facing the back side of the house at Harwood Rd. At 3600 sq �, including a 500 sq � ADU, this house is larger than the other houses in the neighborhood. Los Gatos is known for its quaint look and the Bel Gatos neighborhood exemplifies it. Most lots have limited side setbacks so the houses are designed with minimal windows on the side, for privacy. Whether they are single-story or two stories, privacy is respected. In the case of the proposed home at 16220 Harwood Rd. the loca�on of the house on the flag lot puts the second-story windows and balcony so they look down into the backyard, bedrooms, and bathrooms at Harwood Rd. On a two-dimensional drawing, it's not as obvious but when the orange tape was put up, it illustrated the issue. Why is this allowed? The residents at Harwood Rd. have had privacy for close to 40 years since the pre-school was a single story and now the neighbors will be si�ng on their balcony watching everything in the Harwood Rd. backyard and windows. I think this is the wrong thing to promote in Los Gatos or anywhere else. The house design should be reconsidered to improve privacy. Regards, Larry McCracke From: William Durret <> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 10:01 AM To: jshoopman@losgatosga.gov; Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Concerns regarding development of 16220 Harwood Rd Hello members of the Los Gatos Planning Commission, I am writing to voice some concerns I have regarding the proposed development of 16220 Harwood Rd. My family has lived in the community for close to 40 years. I’ve seen the orchards be removed, miss the horses that use to ride on the streets and now losing a school that was used by so many children. I fear that the development of these three huge houses (with permitted ADUs to be added to the square footage at a later time) will set a concerning precedent for the future of the neighborhood. From reviewing the online materials, each of the three structures appear to be larger than almost all (if not all) of the houses in the original Belwood/Belgatos community. I understand that the proposed development on this unique lot shows three larger houses that appear to have smaller setbacks, limited yard/green space and big footprints. While somewhat comparable in size to houses built later in the late 1980s and 90s, it is still larger that the surrounding houses. When the poles went up, I was surprised at the size. It felt overpowering, especially for a lot that previously housed just one single-story structure. The size and orientation of the proposed structure on Parcel B is the most disturbing. The design of the houses seems to give the most privacy to the new homes being built while impacting the existing homeowners the most. It also will impact views of the mountains by neighbors around the community. I hope the planning commission will further review the impact on the propose size and orienta�on of the developments proposed at 16220 Harwood Rd. I am not saying no to all development, just to development within reason for the neighborhood. Thank you, Bill Durret From: A&A Measles <> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 9:28 AM To: Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: 16220 Harwood Rd Hello, Following up on our concerned about the size of the structures proposed on 16220 Harwood Rd Please take more time to look into the issue. Thanks From: Tiffany Keepers White <> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 9:25 AM To: Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Proper�es at 16220 Hardwood Rd Hello, I am wri�ng to you in regards to the planned proper�es at 16220 Hardwood Road. I am concerned about the proposed size of the these proper�es being too large compared to other dwellings on the street and in the overall surrounding area. The large proposed size does not fit in the spirit of the community and would be detrimental to the nearby houses that would be dwarfed by these new structures. I am also concerned it would decrease property values of surrounding smaller houses. I encourage the planning commitee to work with the developer to reduce the size of the proposed houses. Thank you for your �me and considera�on. Best, Tiffany White From: Julie Kasik <> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 8:16 AM To: Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Concerns regarding development of 16220 Harwood Rd I was unable to atend the planning commission mee�ng regarding the development of 16220 Harwood Rd last month due to work. I did not understand that final decisions were being made at that �me but rather thought that was the beginning of the discussion with the neighborhood to get inputs on modifica�ons to the three structures proposed. Regarding Parcel B, I have many concerns about the size and loca�on of the structure. It is very imposing between the seven houses that exist (plus the Parcel A & C) being built. It is a larger size than neighboring homes despite being on a more constrained lot. My daughter frequently plays at the home next door. The way they have posi�oned Parcel B is very invasive to the neighbors. The second story with a balcony is posi�oned in a way that gives the most privacy to the new structures proposed (Parcel A&C) while giving the least privacy to the exis�ng homes. It looks directly into the backyards which concerns me as my minor daughter o�en swims in their yard. On the design for Parcel B, there is no reason for a balcony to be added to the second story looking into exis�ng neighbor yards. In addi�on, the structure itself could be posi�oned in a different direc�on to give more privacy to all par�es. The Parcel structure could also be reduced in size to be a single story or at least reduce the footprint of the second story. None of these op�ons appear to have considered. When I reviewed the plans online, I was also surprised to see each of the three structures proposed has a Jr. ADU planned. So essen�ally you are building 6 liveable units on a lot that had none. And that is not included in the square footage that was posted on the signs for the Parcels. No wonder they look so huge - there is 500 sq feet more PER STRUCTURE planned. Completely shocking! Way too big and not consistent with the neighborhood. And where are cars even going to park for these ADUs? The driveways do not show space for 4-6 cars. It's a shame to be losing a school and service that has provided for so many in the community. So to have three massive houses take its place does not feel inline with the neighborhood look and feel at all. I hope the planning commission seriously reconsiders the size of the three structures proposed at 16220 Harwood Rd. -- Julie Kasik | From: Maria Giovanna Errico <> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 10:06 PM To: Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Development at 16220 Harwood Rd To Whom it May Concern, I wanted to share my concerns about the size of the structures proposed to be built at 16220 Harwood Rd. They seem very large for the neighborhood. I took the time to briefly look at the plans online and was surprised to see that they are close to 3800 square feet when you include the possible ADU. I did not understand this during the first phase of planning - and I thought the houses were large already at 3200 square feet. I ask that the town review the size of these homes with respect to the original neighborhood which is a nice mix of single and double story homes with big yards. This feels like over development of this lot as proposed, even if it is within code (which I do not pretend to know anything about). I'm sad to see the school go and understand the need for housing - but I am concerned about this structure. I walk around this neighborhood regularly and a building of this size will be out of place and will take away some of the charm of this neighborhood I love. I cannot imagine what the next door neighbor is thinking with having such a large building next them looking into their property and the new lack of privacy. Please reconsider these plans. Sincerely, Maria From: Emily Williams <> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 9:33 PM To : Jocelyn Shoopman <jshoopman@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Concerns Regarding New Housing Structures in Our Neighborhood Dear Jocelyn Shoopman, I hope this email finds you well. I am wri�ng to express my strong concerns about the proposed construc�on of new large housing structures in our neighborhood, specifically 16220 Harwood Road, Parcel B. As a resident who deeply values the character and ambiance of our community, I believe it is crucial to voice our collec�ve apprehensions about this development. Our neighborhood has always been known for its charm, tranquility, and close-knit community spirit. The introduc�on of large housing structures, as outlined in the proposed plans, raises significant apprehensions among many of us. The poten�al impacts on traffic conges�on, local infrastructure, green spaces, and overall quality of life are maters that deeply trouble our residents. While I understand the importance of urban development and housing opportuni�es, I strongly believe that these new structures are not in harmony with the exis�ng architectural and environmental fabric of our neighborhood. Our community's unique character and historical significance should be preserved for genera�ons to come. I kindly request that the Planning Commission consider the following points as they deliberate on the proposed development: 1. **Preserva�on of Community Character:** Our neighborhood's character has been carefully cul�vated over the years, and the introduc�on of large housing structures may disrupt the cohesive aesthe�c and ambiance that define our community. 2. **Infrastructure Strain:** The poten�al strain on local infrastructure, including roads, u�li�es, and public services, should be thoroughly evaluated to ensure that the neighborhood can accommodate the increased popula�on density. Please note, Parcel B is a unique flag lot with a structure between seven single family homes. It has been brought to my aten�on Parcel B has plans for an ADU, to which I understand is allowed, but was not aware the 500 square feet of this structure was not included in the planning. 3. **Traffic Concerns:** Increased housing units may lead to higher traffic volumes, poten�ally causing conges�on and safety issues for pedestrians and motorists alike. Please note this new housing is at a four way stop sign. Families, Children and Adults ride bikes, walk their dogs, children walk to school, families stroll with their babies. The addi�onal housing at this counter causes concerns for more coming and going traffic which brings concern for safety of pedestrians, as Harwood Avenue and Almond Blossom already has fast and inaten�ve drivers. 4. **Green Spaces and Outdoor Areas:** The importance of green spaces, parks, and outdoor areas cannot be understated. Large-scale development might limit our residents' access to these valuable resources. 5. **Community Input:** I urge the Planning Commission to facilitate meaningful community engagement and dialogue to ensure that residents' voices are heard and considered throughout the decision-making process. Given the significant implica�ons of this proposed development, I kindly request that the Planning Commission conducts a comprehensive review and assessment, taking into account the concerns raised by the neighborhood residents. My hope is to ensure that any development aligns with the values, heritage, and quality of life that we hold dear. Thank you for your �me and considera�on. I look forward to any opportunity for open discussions and collabora�ve solu�ons that will benefit both our neighborhood and the broader community. Sincerely, Emily Williams This Page Intentionally Left Blank