Loading...
Item 9 Staff Report Adopt Resolution Adopting the Reformatted "Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas"COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT DATE: March 9, 1998 TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COU CIL FROM: TOWN MANAGER MEETING DATE: 3/16/98 ITEM NO. Ci SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE REFORMATTED "STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS IN THE LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS" RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution adopting the refonnatted "Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas" (Attachment 1). BACKGROUND: At the February 1997 Study Session, Town Council and Planning Commission members discussed the existing Hillside Development Standards (Attachment 2). Council and Commission indicated that many applicants find the Standards confusing. Council and Planning Commission referred the Standards to the Architectural Standards Committee for refinement. Council requested the Committee to consider developing a matrix format as a way to improve the Standards. The Committee tried to put the Standards into a matrix format, but found the matrix more confusing than the existing Standards. The Committee studied Hillside Standards from other jurisdictions such as Los Altos Hills, Oakland, Portola Valley and Santa Barbara for other format ideas. After comparing these documents to the existing Los Gatos Hillside Standards, the Committee decided that reformatting the text and adding graphics would most improve the document. DISCUSSION: The Architectural Standards Committee reformatted the Standards into two sections: 1) Objectives and 2) Standards. Four subsections are in Section 2: Siting the Structure, The Structure, Landscape and Planned Developments. This format sets a sequential order of information that relates to steps taken in site development. The Committee was careful during revisions not to change the intent of the Standards. Section titles were added and language to clarify the Standards was added. For additions to the document, see the redlined text in Attachment 3. In some sections, parts of sentences or whole sentences were stricken with the intent of making the message more concise. Text with strike -out markings is also shown in Attachment 3. A "clean" copy of the reformatted Standards is included as Exhibit A to the Resolution adopting the reformatted Standards (Attachment 1). PREPARED BY: (continued on page 2) LEE E. BOWMAN OS -- PLANNING DIRE TOR Reviewed by: k Attorney Reformatted: 10/23/95 Revised: 3/9/98 9:52 am PAGE 2 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: Reformatted Standards for review of Hillside Development March 9, 1998 CONCLUSION: The Architectural Standards Committee carefully reviewed and compared Hillside Development Standards from other cities and examined the Los Gatos Hillside Standards. The Committee reformatted the Los Gatos Hillside Standards with the intent of improving the user -friendliness of the document. Only text revisions are included at this time. The Committee recommends that Council adopt the reformatted Standards. Once adopted by Council, the Committee will begin adding graphics to further improve the Standards. The Planning Commission considered the reformatted Standards on February 25, 1998 and recommended Council adoption subject to a few minor text amendments (Attachment 4). Staff also recommends that Town Council adopt the Resolution adopting the reformatted Standards for Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Hillside Areas (Attachment 1). ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS: Is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required. FISCAL IMPACT: Adopting the reformatted Hillside Development Standards will have no fiscal impact on the Town. Attachments: 1. Draft Town Council Resolution adopting reformatted "Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas" 2. Existing "Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas" 3. Reformatted Hillside Standards (with revisions marked) 4. Resolution 1998-3 of the Los Gatos Planning Commission LEB:KS:sm N:\DEV\CNCLRPTS\HILLSIDE.REF RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE REFORMATTED "STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS IN THE LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS" WHEREAS, the Los Gatos Town Council and Planning Commission referred this matter to the Architectural Standards Committee in February 1997; and WHEREAS, the Council and Planning Commission requested the Standards to be refined to afford more user -friendliness; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Standards Committee examined and compared Hillside Residential Development Standards from other cities such as Los Altos Hills, Oakland Portola Valley and Santa Barbara; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Standards Committee carefully reviewed the existing Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas in order to reformat the text without revising the intent of the document; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 1998 the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 1998-3 recommending Town Council adoption of the Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas. RESOLVED, that the Town Council finds that the reformatted Standards is not a project subject to CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission recommends that the reformatted Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas, which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, should be adopted by the Town Council. 1 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the 16th day of March 1998 by the following vote. TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: LINDA LUBECK, MAYOR LOS GATOS TOWN COUNCIL ATTEST: MARIAN COSGROVE LOS GATOS TOWN CLERK N:1DEV1RESOS1HILLSIDE.TC kru JOINT PLAN BY THE TOWN OF TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DEPARTMENT STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS IN THE LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS Recommended by the Planning Commission 1/23/80 Adopted by the Town Council 2/4/80 Amended by the Town Council 5/21/90 EXHI[fli Hillside Standards Page 2 The Town has adopted specific objectives and standards to be used in the review of applications for development in the Los Gatos hillsides. These standards should be used in combination with the Considerations required for review of Architecture and Site applications, Town Code Section 29.20.150. 1. OBJECTIVES: 1. To preserve the natural terrain and landscape. 2. To achieve harmony with natural and built environments. 3. To achieve appropriate siting of structures. 4. To ensure safe access, slope protection and fire prevention. 5. To avoid projection of structures above the ridge view protection line. 6. To maximize contiguous and usable open space and minimize grading and roads in Planned Developments. 7. To preserve and provide hillside trails and open space. 11. STANDARDS: A. SITING THE STRUCTURE 1. Selecting the building site a. On heavily wooded lots, an arborist should be retained to advise the builder. The builder and arborist should also meet with the Parks Department on the site prior to the design of the house to consider a site that best preserves the natural terrain and landscape. b. During building siting, consideration should be given to fireplaces. They cannot be located within 10 feet of the dripline of any existing trees. 2. Relationships to Other Structures a. The plans for each house shall show the location and schematic elevation of the houses on each adjoining lot. If there is no house existing or approved for the adjoining lot, then a sketch showing the most likely site for the house with a possible building envelope should be included on the plans. (This requirement may be waived by the DRC where the terrain makes the requirement inappropriate.) 3. Open Space a. Open space shall be contiguous to open space from adjacent parcels and shall provide an uninterrupted band of useable segments for wildlife habitat and the recreational use of others. Hillside Standards Page 3 4. No projection Above Ridgelines a. Projection above the ridge view protection line is prohibited. The plans for each house shall indicate its height in relationship to the ridge view protection line when viewed from specified vantage points. b. Vantage point(s) shall be determined for each existing or proposed lot at the time an application for a tentative map or Architecture and Site is considered. The vantage point(s) will be chosen by the staff in consultation with the subdivider or designer, subject to confirmation by the Planning Commission. c. Each vantage point will be from a specific geographic location, a road, intersection, or other location from which the property is visible. d. The ridge view protection line shall be determined by using the formula demonstrated on Attachment "A" of these standards. Projection above the ridge view protection line is prohibited. e. Projection above the ridge view protection line is only one of the standards to be used in review of applications, and the Planning Commission will use their judgement considering each application on an individual basis when there is a conflict between any of the standards. 5. Grading and Drainage a. Minimize exposed cuts and fills. b. All plans shall include provisions for restoration of cuts and fills and erosion control plans including, but not limited to, silt basins, planting plans, soil preparation and irrigation plans. c. Between October 1 and April 1 interim provisions for erosion and sedimentation control shall be in place within 20 days of the date the grading is begun. i. Provide erosion protection for any concentrated drainage discharge, including channel lining, energy dissipators, and erosion control planting. ii. An erosion/sedimentation control plan shall be included with all site plans and/or grading plans. The erosion/sedimentation control plan shall provide interim (during construction) and ultimate plans for control of erosion and sedimentation or show in detail why this is not necessary. d. Short retaining walls should be substituted for long graded slopes whenever possible. Critical retaining walls shall be made of permanent materials, i.e., concrete or concrete block rather than wood. 6. Roadways and Connections a. Driveways i. Driveways must be safe and must allow for access by emergency vehicles. ii. All driveways shall have an overhead clearance of 15 feet. Hillside Standards Page 4 iii. Driveways must be 18 feet wide unless such width would require excessive grading, in which case the driveway may be reduced in width to a minimum of 12 feet of pavement with a 3-foot shoulder on one side. iv. Driveway approaches shall be located a safe distance from all intersections and street furniture and shall be spaced 20-22 feet minimum apart or immediately adjacent. v. All driveways must be paved in accordance with Town standards. Steep driveways shall have a special traction surface when specified by the DRC. All driveways must be paved prior to occupancy. Driveways must be designed to avoid "bottoming -out" by vehicles, particularly on curves. b. Emergency Vehicle Access i. Driveways that are less than 18 feet wide and more than 150 feet long shall have turnouts in locations as specified by the Development Review Committee (DRC). ii. If the back of the house is more than 150 feet from the street, the driveway must include a turnaround area for emergency vehicles. The turnaround area may be any one of the following: (a) rectangular area 40 feet x 48 feet; (b) circle with a minimum radius of 32 feet; (c) hammerhead with design and dimensions as specified by the fire department. In all cases, the turnaround area cannot have a grade exceeding 5%. iii. Water for fire suppression must be available before any framing. c. Grading i. The maximum slope of any driveway cannot exceed 15% unless it can be demonstrated that a flatter driveway cannot be built without massive grading. Whenever a proposed driveway will exceed 15% grade, the plans submitted must include a profile of the driveway and a grade break at the street and at the garage. B. THE STRUCTURE 1. Building Pad a. Drainage i. Avoid drainage down graded slopes. ii. Avoid concentrated drainage from one lot to another. iii. Avoid drainage across the toe of graded slopes. b. Grading The Town has a grading moratorium that affects the Hillside Areas in the Hazardous Fire Zone (where Class A roof material is required). The grading moratorium is in effect between October 15 and April 15 and monitored by the Director of Building and Engineering Services. Hillside Standards Page 5 2. Design a. Massing i. Three story elevations are prohibited in the hillsides. ii. Two-story houses should be articulated to reduce mass and scale. iii. On parcels where development may be visible, maximum building height is 25 feet. b. Finishes, Colors, and Materials i. Materials and colors shall not visually detract from the natural hillside surroundings when viewed from off -site, especially from the valley floor. ii. Exterior colors shall not exceed the reflectivity value of 30 and shall blend with the natural color of vegetation that surrounds the site. iii. The use of natural materials such as wood and stone is highly recommended. iv. Architectural detailing should be continued all around a house and not just on a "false front." v. Roof materials shall be fire retardant or special purpose. c. Style and Harmony See Town Code Section 29.20.150(b) for Considerations about architectural design and compatibility. d. Accessory Buildings See the Planning Department Administrative Policy for "Accessory Structures". C. LANDSCAPE 1. Preserve natural trees and vegetation a. Preserve existing trees when siting the house, pool and any paved areas. A tree is considered impacted if there is any construction or grading within the dripline of the tree. i. When any tree may be impacted by the proposal, information on the size, condition, actual driplines, elevation of natural ground at the trunk, species and variety of tree shall be submitted with the plans. ii. If a tree must be removed, information on the visual impact of the removal as well as the impact on adjoining trees shall be submitted with plans. iii. There should be no construction or grading of any kind within the dripline of any existing trees. However, when work is necessary within the dripline of a tree, Hillside Standards Page 6 information concerning paving materials, foundation (including the use of piers and grade beams), etc., shall be submitted with the plans, and consideration shall be given to using retaining walls to maintain natural grades around the base of trees. b. Plans should specify what type of pruning, if any, will be required on the trees that are to remain. 2. Plant with indigenous materials a. Choice of plant materials for erosion control planting should be aesthetic and practical. b. All planting plans, including erosion control plans, shall emphasize the use of native plants. 3. Lighting See Zoning Code Section 29.10.09015 "Control of Outdoor Lighting" and Section 29.10.09035 "Performance Standards as to Glare". Lighting of court game areas is subject to Architecture and Site review. D. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS All preceding standards also apply to Planned Development applications as well. 1. An architect, landscape architect, civil engineer, or other professional skilled in the siting of buildings and roadways in hillside areas should be retained to advise on the siting of each house. a. The existing natural grade as well as the proposed final grade shall be shown on all elevations submitted with plans. 2. The design, location and orientation of the house on the lot shall be in harmony with the physical features of the land. Design elements which shall be considered include appropriate pad and floor elevations, foundation system, split or multi -level on steeper lots, or flat pad construction on more level sites, proper orientation relative to the slope of the land, and the location of trees and other physical features. 3. The least restrictive areas within sub -areas 2-9 shall be defined as those areas: a. Below the ridgeview protection line as defined by the military crest zone formula in Attachment "A". b. Outside riparian corridors. c. With a 30 percent slope or less. d. Where the impact on the natural habitat including trees, wildlife corridors, cut and fill slopes and natural watersheds are minimized. 4. Developers are encouraged to consider varying lot sizes, and design and site houses that create the least disturbance to the natural landscape. Hillside Standards Page 7 5. Within Sub Area One of the Hillside Specific Plan, development outside of the least restrictive areas, as identified by the Blossom Hill Open Space Study, is prohibited except when all of the following conditions exist. a. When the development is clearly in compliance with the other provisions of the Hillside Development Standards, Hillside Specific Plan and General Plan. b. When development outside of the least restrictive areas does not result in unnecessary grading, tree removal or threaten the natural landscape; and is more advantageous as determined by the Planning Commission to accomplish these goals. c. When access to a development within a least restrictive area can only be attained by developing a road outside a least restrictive area. d. When project visibility from the valley floor will be minimized or will not exist. 6. Within sub -areas 2-9 in the Hillside Specific Plan, development is also prohibited outside the least restrictive areas. a. Since the Blossom Hill Open Space Study did not map the least restrictive area outside sub -area 1, development applications will be required to map the least restrictive areas for their individual development sites within sub -areas 2-9. 7. Open space should not consist of remnants "left over" after a developer has chosen building sites. Development within the hillsides should occur by first identifying the open space plan for the subdivision and then identifying building sites. a. A 30-foot trails corridor shall be provided in easement to ensure development is adequately set back from the hillside trail system. b. As a part of any subdivision approval, a maintenance district for the payment of maintenance of these trails shall be formed. 8. Driveway approaches should be located to maximize on -street parking, especially on curves or cul-de-sac bulbs. Attachments: Figure 1: Figure 2: Hillside Specific Plan Map showing Sub -Area boundaries Building Treatment at Slopes and Ridges, from Blossom Hill Open Space Study ks5 \asc\compare. h i l l 1 u. 7 a9 a a1 z 3 /3Z � 8 sf:34 „g_ 1 Q e W - 0 N = :; i . 1 � � r ® zv• �i ,�. $ 3 2-4=ao eta°rH u : i: i i ® ® 0 a J en \-z3 \N All111111111111111111111111111111/ TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DEPARTMENT STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS IN THE LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS Recommended by the Planning Commission 1/23/80 Adopted by the Town Council 2/4/80 Amended by the Town Council 5/21/90 Section 29.20.150 of the Los Gatos Town Code specifies the types of consideration that must be given to all architecture and site approval applications. The Town has adopted the specific objectives and standards listed below to be used in the review of applications in the Los Gatos hillsides. The italicized portions are excerpts from the Los Gatos Town Code. SEC. 29.20.150: CONSIDERATIONS IN REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS The deciding body shall consider all relevant matter including, but not limited to, the following: (1) Considerations relating to traffic safety and traffic congestion: The effect of the site development plan on traffic conditions on abutting streets, the layout of the site with respect to locations and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian entrances, exits, drives, and walkways; the adequacy of off-street parking facilities to prevent traffic congestion; the location, arrangement, and dimension of truck loading and unloading facilities; the circulation pattern within the boundaries of the development, and the surfacing and lighting of off-street parking facilities. Objective 1.1: Driveways must be safe and must allow for access by emergencv vehicles. Standards: 1.1.1 The maximum slope of any driveway cannot exceed 15% unless it can be demonstrated that a flatter driveway cannot be built without massive grading. Whenever a proposed driveway will exceed 15% grade, the plans submitted must include a profile of the driveway and a grade break at the street and at the garage. 1.1.2 Driveways must be 18 feet wide unless such width would require excessive grading, in which case the driveway may be reduced in width to a minimum of 12 feet of pavement with a 3-foot shoulder on one side. 1.1.3 Driveways that are less than 18 feet wide and more than 150 feet Tong shall have tumours in locations as specified by the Development Review Committee (DRC). 1.1.4 All driveways shall have an overhead clearance of 15 feet. 1.1.5 Ali. driveways must be paved in accordance with Town standards. Steep driveways shall have a special traction surface when specified by the DRC. All driveways must be paved prior to occupancy. 1.1.6 if the back of the house is more than 150 feet from the street, the driveway must include a turnaround area for emergency vehicles. The turnaround area may be any one of the following: (a) rectangular area 40 feet x 48 feet; (b) circle with a minimum radius of 32 feet; (c) hammerhead with design and dimensions as specified by the fire department. In all cases, the turnaround area cannot have a grade exceeding 5%. L27`reparts\A&S 1 Objective 4.1: Planned D ielopment shall be required in hillside aree o maximize contiguous and usable open spa, And to minimize aradinciand roads. Deve)_ .jers are encouracied to use smaller than one acre lot sizes. The houses shall be designed and sited to create the least disturbance to the natural landscape. a. Within Sub Area One of the Hillside Specific Plan, development outside of the least restrictive areas, as identified by the Blossom Hill Open Space Study, is prohibited except when all of the following conditions exist. • • Standards: When the development is clearly in compliance with the other provisions of the Hillside Development Standards, Hillside Specific Plan and General Plan. When development outside of the least restrictive areas does not result in unnecessary grading, tree removal or threaten the natural landscape; and is more advantageous as determined by the Planning Commission to accomplish these goals. When access to a development within a least restrictive area can only be attained by developing a road outside a least restrictive area. When project visibility from the valley floor will be minimized or will not exist. (Amended by Resolution No.1990-112) 4.1.1 it is strongly recommended that an architect, landscape architect, civil engineer, or other professional skilled in the siting of buildings and roadways in hillside areas be retained to advise on the siting of each house. 4.1.2 The existing natural grade as well as the proposed final grade shall be shown on all elevations submitted with plans. 4.1.3 The design, location and orientation of the house on the lot shall be in harmony with the physical features of the land. Design elements which shall be considered include appropriate pad and floor elevations, foundation system, split or multi -level on steeper lots, or flat pad construction on more level sites, proper orientation relative to the slope of the land, and the location of trees and other • physical features. Objective 4.2 Within sub -areas 2-9 within the Hillside Specific Plan, development is also prohibited outside the least restrictive areas. Since the Blossom Hill Open Space Study did not map the !east restrictive area outside sub -area 1, development applications will be required to map the least restrictive areas for their individual development sites within sub -areas 2-9. Standards 4.2.1 The least restrictive areas within sub -areas 2-9 shall be defined as those areas: a. Below the ridgeview protection line as defined by the military crest zone formula in Attachment A. b. Outside riparian corridors. c. With a 30 percent slope or less. d. Where the impact on the natural habitat including trees, wildlife corridors, cut and • fill slopes and natural watersheds are minimized. 4.2.2 The exceptions to developing outside the least restrictive areas are noted in Objective 4.1 L27\r.parts`A8S 3 Objective 5.2: Preserve th4 natural terrain. Standards: 5.21 Minimize exposed cuts and fills. 522 All plans shall include provisions far restoration of cuts and fins and erosion control plans including, but not limited to, silt basins, planting plans, soil preparation and irrigation plans. 5.23 Between October 1 and April 1 interim provisions for erosion and sedimentation within 20 days of the date the grading is begun. a. Provide erosion protection for any concentrated drainage discharge, including channel lining, energy dissipaters, and erosion control planting. b. An erosion/sedimentation control plan shall be included with ail site plans and/or grading plans. The erosion/sedimentation control plan shall provide interim (during construction) and ultimate plans for control of erosion and sedimentation or show in detail why this is not necessary. 5.2.4 Choice of plant materials for erasion control planting shall be based on aesthetics as well as practicality. 5.2.5 Short retaining walls should be substituted for Iona graded slooes whenever possible. 5.2.6 Critical retaining walls shall be made of permanent materials, i.e., concrete or concrete block rather than wood. (6) Considerations relating to the exterior architectural design of buildings and structures: The effect of the height, width, shape and exterior construction and design of buildings and structures as such factors relate to the existing and future character of the neighborhood and purposes of the zone in which they are situated, and the purposes of architecture and site approval. Objective 6.1: Harmonious develooment. Standards: 6.1.1 Materials and colors shall not visually detract from the natural hillside surroundings when viewed from off -site, especially from the valley floor. Exterior colors shall not exceed the reflectivity value of 30 and shall blend with the natural color of vegetation that surrounds the site. The use of natural materials such as wood and stone is highly recommended. 6.1.2 Architectural detailing should be continued all around a house and not just on a "false front." 6.1.3. Three story elevations are prohibited in the hillsides and two-story houses should be articulated to reduce mass and scale. On parcels where development may be visible, maximum building height is25feet (Amended by Resolution No. 1990-112) Objective 6.2: Safety. Standards: 6.21 Roof materials shall be fire retardant or special purpose. 6.2.2 There shall be spark arrestors on all chimneys, and branches of trees must be trimmed back 10 feet from all chimneys. Therefore, fireplaces cannot be located within 10 feet of the dripline of any existing trees. 127\roports\A&S 5 r TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DEPARTMENT STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS IN THE LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS Recommended by the Planning Commission 1/23/80 Adopted by the Town Council 2/4/80 Amended by the Town Council 5/21/90 3 Hillside Standards ace Page 3 a. Oycn spd,, should b,, paooid,.d ia. aaasa aathcr than its faa�al.cuA Open space shall be contiguous to open space from adjacent parcels and shall provide an uninterrupted band of useable segments for wildlife habitat/cord`or and the recreational use of others. o ection ALE ,9Yer, Ines a. The plans for each house shall indicate wL,.tk, a ,.. not it mill ya 4 ct aLv di,. l e1 ations�iito`the ridge view protection line when viewed from specified vantage oints -nd � P P � P , of so, .ndi,dtt, by prufal,. dud sight L... when and Low auu,h of ,L,. Lous, will b, r.siLl, . Eadi ding elevation stialI also m�rcare th^e maxunum lief tofthe:st77 tine rf t extstulg b. Vantage point(s) shall be determined for each existing or proposed lot at the time an application for a tentative map or Architecture and Site is considered. The vantage point(s) will be chosen by the the subdivider or designer in consultation with staff., subjca tv Lodi,matio.1 Ly the �ldalau.a� COalauaiau,.u. c. Each vantage point will be from a specific geographic location, a road, intersection, or other location from which the property is visible. ... TLc purp,.s. of Lhvoaia.g a raa.ta6,, yoLlt oa yoiuta into alh.w a u.vac pa,.,.is,. Lvaluati,.a. of Vv h,.tll,.a a pa uj os .d aL. uctut c will ayyLai to pa\.ta ud,, abulrc tL,, a adg,. �l,w pa wh,.aa vi,.w,.d faom ill,, vautagc pouat(a). d. The ridge view protection line shall be determined by using the formula demonstrated on Attachment "A" of these standards. Projection above the ridge view protection line is prohibited. e. Projection above the ridge view protection line is only one of the standards to be used in review of applications, and the Plaau,ing dectdtng,,646will use their judgement considering each application on an individual basis when there is a conflict between any of the standards. ran rani_age, a. Minimize exposed cuts, -and fills, and jargeuexpasises of retalnwalls b. All plans shall include provisions for restoration of cuts and fills and erosion control plans including, but not limited to, silt basins, planting plans, soil preparation and irrigation plans, aadlFetaYain� wall.detailsaad�plans c. Between October 1 and April 1 interim provisions for erosion and sedimentation control shall be in place within 20 days of the date the grading is begun. i. Provide erosion protection for any concentrated drainage discharge, including channel lining, energy dissipators, and erosion control planting. ii. An erosion/sedimentation control plan shall be included with all site plans and/or grading plans. The erosion/sedimentation control plan shall provide interim (during construction) and ultimate plans for control of erosion and sedimentation or show in detail why this is not necessary. Hillside Standards iii. Avoid drainage across the toe of graded slopes. Iec�nate:sirerira ���mus�6e�s o�r�C�th���.air� Page 5 The"Town as -a grading: moratorium. thhar affects the i ifside:Areas: In lie Hazardous% Kong(where: Class A,roo£matenaLik.requued) The.gradingmoratorium is ineffectbetweenetoliec 1 pilipi . 5aud.moniroredibytheDirectar gf Sutldmganci ngmeenngaSerpc i. Three story elevations are prohibited in the hillsides. ni and Two-story houses should be articulated to reduce mass and scale. at. On parcels where development may be visible, maximum building height is 25 feet. �xusl Mors-,, and: Materials i. Materials and colors shall not visually detract from the natural hillside surroundings when viewed from off -site, especially from the valley floor. i= Exterior colors shall not exceed the reflectivity value of 30 and shall blend with the natural color of vegetation that surrounds the site. The use of natural materials such as wood and stone is highly recommended. iv. Architectural detailing should be continued all around a house and not just on a "false front." v. Roof materials shall be fire retardant of purpose. ompatibility: CE S a <Buildiugs 5e O ann ngDepa%turent El Fate e)ti e ve Watts .trees anc_yegetation rations Agin. larclutectural design. Ana of "Accessory Structures"' a. Consi L th, piti.A.1 vatavu of existing trees when siting the house, pool and any paved areas. A tree is considered impacted if there is any construction or grading within the dripline of the tree. Hillside Standards Page 7 b. Outside riparian corridors. c. With a 30 percent slope or less. d. Where the impact on the natural habitat including trees, wildlife corridors, cut and fill slopes and natural watersheds are minimized. 5. Tl.� cx��ptiOIIStu d�oGluYiu��iataldc the least vaaCnotcd in ObJ,.ctl7'C4. 4. Developers are encouraged to use smaller than one acre lot sizes. The houses shall be designed and sited to create the least disturbance to the natural landscape. 5. Within Sub Area One of the Hillside Specific Plan, development outside of the least restrictive areas, as identified by the Blossom Hill Open Space Study, is prohibited except when all of the following conditions exist. a. When the development is clearly in compliance with the other provisions of the Hillside Development Standards, Hillside Specific Plan and General Plan. b. When development outside of the least restrictive areas does not result in unnecessary grading, tree removal or threaten the natural landscape; and is more advantageous as determined by the Planning Commission to accomplish these goals. c. When access to a development within a least restrictive area can only be attained by developing a road outside a least restrictive area. d. When project visibility from the valley floor will be minimized or will not exist. 6. Within sub -areas 2-9 in the Hillside Specific Plan, development is also prohibited outside the least restrictive areas. a. Since the Blossom Hill Open Space Study did not map the least restrictive area outside sub -area 1, development applications will be required to map the least restrictive areas for their individual development sites within sub -areas 2-9. 7. Open space should not consist of remnants "left over" after a developer has chosen building sites. Development within the hillsides should occur by first identifying the open space plan for the subdivision and then identifying building sites. a. A 30-foot trails corridor shall be provided in easement to ensure development is adequately set back from the hillside trail system. b. As a part of any subdivision approval, a maintenance district for the payment of maintenance of these trails shall be formed. 8. Driveway approaches should be located to maximize on -street parking, especially on curves or cul-de-sac bulbs. Attachments: Figure 1: Figure 2: Hillside Specific Plan Map showing Sub -Area boundaries Building Treatment at Slopes and Ridges, from Blossom Hill Open Space Study ks5lasc\hillside.opt RESOLUTION 1998 - 3 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE REFORMATTED "STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS IN THE LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS" WHEREAS, the Los Gatos Town Council and Planning Commission referred this matter to the Architectural Standards Committee in February 1997; and WHEREAS, the Council and Planning Commission requested the Standards to be refined to afford more user -friendliness; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Standards Committee examined and compared Hillside Residential Development Standards from other cities such as Los Altos Hills, Oakland Portola Valley and Santa Barbara: and WHEREAS, the Architectural Standards Committee carefully reviewed the existing Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas in order to reformat the text without revising the intent of the document. RESOLVED, that the Town Council finds that the reformatted Standards is not a project subject to CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission recommends that the reformatted Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas, which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, should be adopted by the Town Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the 25th day of February 1998 by the following vote. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS: AYES: Paul A. Bruno, Marcia Jensen, Kathryn Morgan, Laura Nachison, Leonard Pacheco, Joe Pirzynski, Chair Sandy Decker NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SIGNED: /s/ Sandy Decker SANDY DECKER, CHAIR LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: /s/ Lee E. Bowman LEE E. BOWMAN SECRETARY N:IDEVIRESOSIHILLSIDE.STN DEPTMENT: AGENDA ITEM: INTERNAL TRACKING g RESO/ORD NUMBER: DATE BY LIST IN BOOK ON DISC OR SHARE. FORM SENT TO DEPT. PUBLISH IF REQUIRED - Date of Publication ORDINANCES ONLY WHEN SIGNATURE AND /s/ COPY (1 EACH) returned, LIST ON SIGNATURE TRACKING & SEND TO MAYOR MAIL TO DISTRIBUTION LIST NO.of COPIES: PROOF OF MAILING PREPARED SIGN BY CLERK/SEAL ENTER INTO ECM ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION FILE ' K.0 k1 FILE IN VAULT CODIFICATION IF ORDINANCE c Ik: d l6:laher\ordres2 O 'CE OF THE TOWN CLERK ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS ORIGINATING DEPT: COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: Number: RESOLUTION 1991 —zo Date of Adopt: 3 - / & - 51 PUBLICATION REOUIREDI COUNCIL ACTION: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS NAMES: Number. Date of Intro: Date of Adopt: ZONE CHANGE: Randy Attaway, Joanne Benjamin, Steven Blanton, Jan Hutchins, Mayor(or Chairman) LINDA LUBECK ORDINANCE ORDINANCES and RESOLUTIONS MUST BE RETURNED TO TOWN CLERK BY WEDNESDAY AT 12 NOON. ORDINANCES MUST BE READY FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION TC: D7: RESO-ORD RESOLUTION 1998 - 20 RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE REFORMATTED "STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS IN THE LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS" WHEREAS, the Los Gatos Town Council and Planning Commission referred this matter to the Architectural Standards Committee in February 1997; and WHEREAS, the Council and Planning Commission requested the Standards to be refined to afford more user -friendliness; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Standards Committee examined and compared Hillside Residential Development Standards from other cities such as Los Altos Hills, Oakland Portola Valley and Santa Barbara; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Standards Committee carefully reviewed the existing Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas in order to reformat the text without revising the intent of the document; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 1998 the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 1998-3 recommending Town Council adoption of the Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas. RESOLVED, that the Town Council finds that the reformatted Standards is not a project subject to CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission recommends that the reformatted Standards for the Review of Architecture and Site Applications in the Los Gatos Hillside Areas, which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, should be adopted by the Town Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the 16th day of March 1998 by the following vote. TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: Randy Attaway, Joanne Benjamin, Steven Blanton, Jan Hutchins, Mayor Linda Lubeck NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SIGNED: /s/ Linda Lubeck LINDA LUBECK, MAYOR LOS GATOS TOWN COUNCIL ATTEST: /s/ Marian V. Cosgrove MARIAN V. COSGROVE LOS GATOS TOWN CLERK N:1DEV1RESOS1HILLSIDE.TC Town Council Minutes March 16, 1998 Redevelopment Agency Los Gatos, California SCHEDULE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (01.01) Informational report regarding currently scheduled public hearings was received and filed. COUNTY REFERRALS (02.47) Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mrs. Benjamin, action concerning County Referrals: NUMBER LOCATION APPLICANT 6064 14531 Arnerich Rd. Salem Carried unanimously. that Council approve the recommended REQUEST RECOMMENDATION Time Extension Approval/No Conditions PLANNING COMMISSION/PLANNING DEPARTMENT MONTHLY STATUS REPORT (03.47) Informational report regarding activity of Planning Commission and Department was received and filed. RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL/FEBRUARY 1998 (04.V) Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mrs. Benjamin, that Council ratify the check registers for the payrolls of February 8 through February 21, 1998 paid on February 27, 1998 in the amount of $323,783.03. Carried unanimously. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE/RATIFICATION/FEBRUARY-MARCH 1998 (05.V) Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mrs. Benjamin, that Council ratify the accompanying check registers for accounts payable invoices paid on February 27 and March 6, 1998 in the amount of $453,433.10. Carried unanimously. MINUTES OF MARCH 2, 1998 (06.V) Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mrs. Benjamin, that Council approve the Minutes of March 2, 1998 as submitted. Carried unanimously. ANNUAL TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT (07.28) Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mrs. Benjamin, that Council accept informational Annual Traffic Safety Report and file. Carried unanimously. LIBRARY SERVICES/TECHNOLOGY ACT GRANT OF $5,000 GRANDPARENTS & BOOKS PROGRAM (08.44) Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mrs. Benjamin, that Council authorize the Town Manager to accept a Library Services and Technology Act Grant of $5,000 for a Grandparents and Books Program. Carried unanimously. LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS/ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS STANDARDS FOR REVIEW/RESOLUTION 1998-20 (09.46) Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mrs. Benjamin, that Council adopt Resolution 1998-20 entitled, RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE REFORMATTED "STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATIONS IN THE LOS GATOS HILLSIDE AREAS." Carried unanimously. TC: D10: MM031698 2