2009120707 Attachment 5H
a)
0
H
Teresita. The Applicant is proposing to
)J
gn
the project a demolition.
1 -�
O W L)
was proposed
r-)
0
0
Q1
a)
U
t
the proposed design and the
encouraged the Applicant
location of the pool
O
i)
a)
o
Id
0 3
41
4) 0
LH
bring it into compliance. After several resubmittals with
that the entire
located on a slope greater
surrounding decking was
than 30%.
to relocate or
The Applicant has been
is presenting the
O
0
from the proposal
ission at this time
a complete
with some
are in direct conflict with the Hillside Development
rn
0
01
O
H _
co 0
H a)
H �
Na)
O H
U N
-
H
co
a v
O
0
U
co
a
N
N ,O 0 CO Ol .-1 N N)• 1.00 m •-1 N d1 ,fl
.-I .-1 ,-1 rl ri HI .--I ri .-1 H N N N N N N
W
0 N
0 0) '1-I
a)X,0 0 W
0 a) 0 0 N
NW 01drt
1d 0 (y O N
H 0ai G'
I(d )0 m 0
zUa,zh
Wendie R. Rooney
Transcribed by:
ri
(O 0 W 01 ,-1 N "1 0 co O) O ri N • d4 ,f)
Attachment 5
the Hillside Development Standards and
is in conflict
Code. The application is not
O
EI
w
u
0
0
103
Guidelines
meeting. The
be approved at
complete and cannot
the application or
ission's options
Planning Co
0
0
with direction
44
44
03
L)
O
application back to
0)
to remand
the application
44
0
0
0
m
construction of
This completes Staff's report and we're here if
questions.
a)
0
0
ACTING C
0
0
Applicant,
h
3-1
0
0
0
0
44
1-3
ro
0
O
JJ
presentation? You have five minutes
presentation.
Hi, I'm Dave Maggetti, the owner.
This is not a demolition. The whole house is being reused.
0
than the roof
ground. We're not doing any grading. We're adding
a)
N
retaining walls
of
0
0
N
rd
O
H _
N
N
H 01
O H
U N
U el
(-4
H
a 0
a v
m 1'
O
O
a
4 N r') 00 01 (0 00 m 01 .i <V r0 00 0l l0 00 ro
H '-1 4 H .4 4
01
G
G
03
,.)
a)
}a
de,
O
0
.0
3-1
44)
0)
0
N
0) u
bl O
i O
w
0 .0
44
significant decking on slopes
grading to
significant
in excess of 4'
13
and entertaining area, and
create a flat pad for
blend with the natural
0
41
0
a)
materials
reflective for the hillside. The
too light or
and rear setbacks
also requesting reduced
for construction of
N
N
O
0
O
-d w
0 x-)
u) a)
0 (1)
0 lu
U
.0
0
G
O
O
Id
40,000 square
0
n)
0
0
0
In
41 U
N C
3-1
• N N
41 0) E• N411
• 0 0
w v
u) •. w
rl U
1) rl 0)
O 4 0)
lots when
The Code does
of the zone on nonconforming
4-)
0
but the intent
0
0
0
0
,QO
A
0
0
0
rt
N
the ordinance
ediate neighborhood and
ri
with existing conditions of the
into established setbacks because
w
0
U
0
O
U
0)
w
not to allow
neighbors.
U)
.0
it suits the
reductions are marrying conditions on other
v
v
0
0
a
N
04
ediate neighborhood.
properties in the i
the proposal should be
Id
31
14
The Applicant feels
a)
44)
C
0
allowed because the visibility and the impact
w
44
CR
1.1
O
4.4
owner is not interested in continuing with
application
as proposed.
0
00 01
Q
v X
00
ri
3-i Ai 44
JJ
44 3
a 3 a
00
i U m
a,
that the
for direction on
the proposal
.-i N t•') 00 V1 1.0 CO as .-i ri N t'1 d�
.-1 H .-1 1 ▪ rl H • 4 c-I .4 .i N N N N N N
Does anybody have any questions
the plans and are
0
a)
0
N
you've all
that are in question
The areas
the project.
ro
0
U
are listed on
a)
O
wasn't introduced before is Marni suggested that we bring a
up for you
a)
43
w
0
a photograph
0
)d
of this if you'd like.
i
rd
Or
it okay? Okay, thank
a)
a)
N
00
U
Ca
three areas in question,
the
a re
outside of the setback. We're continuing
J-)
N
P
4)
H
any neighbors.
the same direction that the existing garage
0
11)
N
the existing deck is
extend that
0
1)
01
a) '0
o -a
O N
? a)
P,
N J-1
# In qi
r C
rt
v
N
appropriate design change. Area
already in the setback, we're
deck for
yard access. Area #3, we understand that that part is on a
H N M d) N (O N CO dl .i (V ci N 0)
H rl H ri ri ri rl -1 .i .-1 N N N N N (V
the southeast corner, we're
enlarge the
to the garage, so that's what's
11$
o o
43 i)
0
0 00 43
N N ,0
d JJ
be called a demolition, but
remodel. We went to great lengths
than the
5-1
a)
1)
.0
O
kept the entire property exactly how it is
here. My neighbors can't see
01
N
O
04
W
be viewed
It's tucked into the
properties
frustrating because there
hope you guys
H
H 0
N a)
a) .(1
0 A)
10
0 0
0) w
4) >
H o
U Of a)
r)
N a) a) f0
a)
1) a) N a)
Hrd
. 3
a : a)
(0 0
have way more square footage and pools
think we averaged out
the flags. It's not a drastic remodel_
site and saw
is a simple remodel, a simple pool.
a)
o
•.
01 H
'cpqs 0
0
FC U S 0
'0 (0
o � U U 0
00 .-1
(0 v 'o a)
.0 31 0 •-1
E 1) a) 0
A
>, aa)) E1 -.-1
N
a)
E U 0
a)
3 0 "
o Q
if anyone has any questions for
are you introducing to
DAVID MAGGETTI:
ACTI
f
0 H
2
0
u
0
>1
ri N M d) N (O () 0D CO H N Ol (0
H .-) H H H -1 -1 .-1 ci c-1 N N N N N N
LD
44
0 -)
--1 v
0 3
ini 0)
w 44
04 i)
0) 'O
.0 0
w
0
w
u
H
COMMISSIONER SAYOC:
the height requirements
requirements?
Guidelines
The Hillside
IEL TOWNSEND:
R
suggest that the retaining walls need
they're stepped exactly at
44
0
9
m
ai
0
0
?1
0)
0
0
N
0
application yourself?
DANIEL TO
that's what it
0
rt
0
0)
w
to demolish?
H
10
5
O
}1
a
1d
requesting
rt
it's a demolition rather
than a remodel?
ary and I just heard it wasn't a demolition,
application s
evidently somebody applied...
That's not something that we
continuous
as
0
tn
rt
ro
0)
)1
R
0)
3
0
0)
N
z 0 u
w 0) C
6
0 0 H
E U i
w 44 N
H 0 YI
U rn
C] C
0) -qdq
.0
rd
0) R1
14
o .0
0 .4
0)
41
demolition_"
COMMISSIONER MICCICHE:
technical demolition?
m
o
0
N
o �
o
N N N N
H
ON
O 04
U N
VI M
H
a
a0)
0
O H
co
0
a
co
10 r 00 T 0 .i N 1") 0 N '0 L` 00 0) 'i N
.-1 .-1 .-I ci ,-1 .-( .-1 .-1 ,-1 ri N N N N N N
0
G
ro
0)
5
0 0
o rt 9.30
o v
'0)
0 0
N N
o
ACTING CHAIR JENSEN:
questions for Mr. Townsend?
do have a
H
0
0
UT
ISSIONER
0
U
changes have
our Exhibit #3 of
0)
0)
0
H
N
N
N
0)
1) 1) H
0
+� 0
0o >I A 0
a N 04
i 0
w H w
w (1) 0 0)
0 0) .0
>1 0)
N U 0 0
0 14
0)
PIN td 0
co a a
w r1
0 0 00
H m 0,
41 a3
w H A
H A-)
0 la 10
been made
you've relocated the
submittal
inaccurate.
The second
A
0
A A
0 A to
41
u o�a
0 (0 0
0
O
0
1)
C
.-I
0
a
side has been
0)
0 .0 "
a 1) 0
E O
4)
0j
0 1
>4 0
(/) N
0)
i)
COMMISSIONER
la
question I had
the retaining wall
mention that
modified into
correct?
correct,
DANIEL TO
has been relocated
towards the west. It's been moved at the Planning
logical part of the
Department's
currently located now.
site, which is where it
-1 N r-1 d1 0) t4 N m 0) .-I N M r W r1 N r) d1 N
.-) ri N N N N N N
w
on page A-4 of your plan. My question is
for the pool?
o
E.
H
0 a
o w
5 7 H
aS
O S A
rt
a) 4
rn
m
a) 3
o
hillside.
hillside?
a)
0
Yes. The vertical dimension
a
the horizontal
141
COMMISSIONER
It's at the stage now where this
w
0
0
have a structural
O
3
0
N
design and concept,
v
aS
JJ
4)
create a structural analysis
not important
knowing whether the pool
0
0
0
m
would like
H
a)
a)
V)
H
O
U
would help
U
H
know where the grade is on this drawing.
Is that the
N
a)
0
0
W
w
2 z
RI U1
O a. cn
z §
0 00
4H H
H
-.. to
A cn ,-1
a) w H w
N HH, U. ' H
Q 0 U A
a)
ri
0
a)
0
0
and I don't
If you look at A-4
The existing grade line, is that
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:
0
0
O
N
•-
H
O �
H rs-
0
H
cn u
( al
H ?,
N a)
O E.
U N
0 0 )
z
H
a
a w
cn U
O H
O
a
0
H
CO al .-) N M d0 N hCO
ci ri rl ri ri ri rl ri rl .-V N N N N N N
needed to
H
(inaudible).
that the pool
4)
r)
0
A
a)
q
0
W
En
0
c‘•
H
Q
rd
Before Commissioner
ACTING CHAIR
BIS
Talesfore
a demolition.
the Town's definition
W
0
E
0
rt
addition
triggering is
explanation,
that they're not maintaining 50% contiguous exterior wall
it at multiple points along the
area, so they're
they're also
a)
m
answer there.
Talesfore.
0
0
N
•-
H
�
H >4
O
H 4,
H
E0)
a)
O E.
iJ N
U '
H
Hj
W �
a5
a
cn"
O H
0
0
cn
ro d0 )n ,o N co a) O .i N co
.4 N N N N N N
speak on behalf of the project,
0
a)
v
N
41
H
H
N
because I've been doing some research on it myself
0
coming up Teresita
v
v
0
house an
v
v
ul
44 0
0
03 0
O o
X4-)
v
H JJ
below the tree line.
N
H
up Kennedy Road.
retaining wall.
grade in the rear
essentially at
131
04
v
x
a)
41
O)
u) 4
a 14
0)
04
0)
property would
0
1)
v
usJ
41
his name was Ed Fuller and he built it back in
done with it,
v
A
O
14
0
U)
H
1 v
0 -rl
HI H1
04 0
0
I'm not saying it's
it could
uglier.
were approaching this
worse and a whole lot
of Mr. Maggetti's work us Parlor 308
v
x
the bottom of Jackson. That's his
right here
remodeled. He was very respectful
structure, added his own touches. The man does
O1
C
.0
0
x
this project
this evening.
0)
O
U
Ot
O N
0 '0
o -�
0 1
R,
u) 0
4a
o
H
0
0
excellent
of reasons. Thank
l0 r CO O\ H N 03 l- W rl N 031/1
ri
existing grade line, if you
look at the top right-hand portion there is a heavy line
an existing retaining wall. That's
shows where
v
L)
rd
existing grade, and the existing grade continues
.0 .0
left hand side of
bottom of the retaining wall;
So if you connect
the existing
looked like prior
would have
not the way it is now. There
house being built on
grading in the past, but
there has
rt
v
v
1)
is a house
years ago.
that's probably what it
one more question
0)
rt
41
H
ISSIONER TALESFORE:
In the photograph in the report, Exhibit #5,
04
H
Those are windows, yes. Glazing,
tinted blue.
There is no overhang.
ISSIONER TALESFORE:
no overhang on the windows?
v
m
0
O
41
This is the design of the
W
.0
H
There is no overhang, yes.
W
u)
0
E
a
(3)
a parapet system.
COMMISS
ACTING
Townsend? Thank you, sir. Mr. Leonardis.
reside at
H
Leonardis.
I'm neighbors with Mr. Maggetti.
v
01
rt
this project
.i
r
0)
O
0
o
H 3
ZO J
H
H
N
O
U N
z "
H
a
0))
O H
cn
O
a
H N M d3 0) (0 N CO 00 H N M d0 N l0 hCO 01.i N M (0
N
H
walls, and
consistent with
O
C
therefore is
exceeds that
0
1n
(13
41
03rd
of this document
h
the policies
that not
would like
In addition to
setbacks, disregarding
of the project. There are more aspects
standards
grading section that
grading requirements.
before discussing architecture the
the project
things to discuss are whether
somebody has any
seen. Leonardis
0
1: H
10
!1
O
the opposite ridge and you will look
q
O
of those streets
1~
O
potential ugliness. Right smack do
lie, cheat, and steal relative
0
N
H
0
' uN?
H i1
OE
U N
z"9
H
a
a v
w
O
Ej
Ej
O
i7
0-1 N t•1 '0 ( 1 ▪ l0 N 01 01 .-i N ('1 '0 l0 CO 0, 0.i N N d' N
there are any questions for you. Thank you very
4-1
.H
Let's see
much. Lee Quintana.
4)
a
Thank you. Lee Quintana, 5
saying this is a very good
Report and
W
4-1
m
information in order to either deny or give concrete
direction.
H
of grading. Chapter
the cut -and -fill. It states,
because it ties back in with retaining walls,
that were cited:
that the
landforms of the
new construction retains
"Cut -and -fills in excess of
Grading. It
a)
.4i
U
O
1-1
N
4-)
i1
11
0
U
'O
1:
03
U)
5
0
N
X
w
be reduced
m
41
G'
4)
0
S1
and objectives
Standards and Guidelines. For a pool or a
the Hillside
though you don't have
those figures before you, based on the height of
▪ (0 0- CO 01 t.0l- CO
rl
three minutes if
ACTING CHAIR JENSEN:
to say a rebuttal to anything you've heard. You
a)
x
'0
0
but you're welcome to.
O
1)
don't have
feel like Mr. Leonardis. I know technically
to eliminate adding onto
0
A
O
44
has been the issue
0
0
a
w
a) rt5
0
m
O
31
>
(0 5-1
a)
3 0
4-) 04
0 0 H
N
0 w U]
0) 1) • 34-41 4'
0 H 0
O m 0
O O) -rl O 0
Re
O E
O
N
-0
A)
3 0 en
H
•
J4
0 U U) U O
3 in m
a)
01 'o
}a (d
0
0 Ts
4 0
0)
N
0
rr
N
0) He
0
U H
beginning. We were informed
s
thing was going straight to
before Planning, so
0
th
about the
know there is a
in construction. This
not a demolition.
term, but this
technical
don't know if they're of
some pictures;
the hillside,
any interest, of all
like compared to mine. If you want to see
houses look
ACTING CHAIR JENSEN:
(Mr. Maggetti distributes photographs to the
0
N
d)
r
O id
H _4j
0 N
N
H 34
N
O
U N
M
H
a5
a
m
O H
cn
0
a
.-i N t•1 O1 10 h CO 01 H N 0") 0 if) 0l 34 N M d' N
N N N N N N
Staff let this
lousy story pole. How come
Unbelievable.
I've been
3
O
X
0
demolition,
tipping point,
0)
0
In
this explanation that
architecture
I'm not making it
dicey, and
0
41.1
G'
X
out here was
intent and thrust of all the community
a)
1)
N
0)
5-4
54)
o 0)
o a)
0) 0
o
R al
01 m
-d .0
'-I U u .0 `0
0 0 A)
U) W 0
0 U) 1) 0 -0
-0 -ri .04 N >) '7+
looking at that
H
for the mountainside.
i)
U) H
4)
0 See
H 0
0 0
)0
N N U
1) -.a rt
U
wall. I mean it
squares, it's all
y
with the mandatory thrust
0
'0
O
mountainside be compatible
of Mother
1)
N
A
W
04
0
U 0
o
>t 34
-ri
11
0
04
0
0i
I love me
do an architecture,
mus
thrust is, go
0
0
U)
0
! -)
0 '-i
> H
N >,
> Ai
Ai
0
0
H
0
LL
up the curb
San Jose and rape it,
O
U N
CDr'l
z"
H
rezt
>0 N
A 414 b
o
u) 34 to ))
H
Q FC N 4
0 q C7
en See co
-.I o13 x 0
I� a
3 >1
-I a)
E. -34
0
0
0� 0
Happy to be of service to the
.-1 N Ol d) vl CO 01 rl IV 0) d) l/1 r 03 01O .-1 N 01 0)
H rl H ci ri .i rl HI ri '-i N N N N N N
Maggetti? Commissioner Micciche.
want to ask one
H
COMMISSIONER MICCICHE:
understand the
H
question. As
pools and courts are prohibited
correct?
m
a)
H
correct.
MOSELEY:
COMMISSIONER MICCICHE:
that, right Mr. Korb?
it's an absolute
prohibition, then you cannot
RS
v
4-+
the way I
COMMI
the architecture,
that point
a)
rt
4-1
S.'
O
O U
N H
1n v o
o a 'o
w o v
H
e
cannot be
proceeding with
that correct?
constructed as proposed,
feeling. We knew we
That was my
v
41
U
v
.0
v
4-1
U)
01
0
4)
0
U
?1 v O
v
rd
8 i>
.0u 3 m 0
0 . 41 U
0 01 qq
qq 0 H
rt 0 0
H C ri
E O P1 H v 0
WA-1 1-1 U
A N 0
0 N 01
H
.-
restriction. We
were getti
going to get
t
gh
issues on the house.
t
of the poo
the pool; we already
3
0
0
that, but we have to go through this process.
0
qoq
3 X
m
0
0
N
.-
ri
ci >4
0
H
co
H
H �
v
0 F1
U N
zH
z7H
a �
a
a v
(4)4-1
O
U
0
a
CO
.4 N 04 10 N 10 t` OD 0) 0 .1 N m d0 N 19 r CO CO.4 N t•'1 10
N N N N N N
1n
11
0
04
0)
41
looking at.
basically, and then there should be a picture of my house
with Mr. Leonardis's above it,
41
ACTING CHAIR JENSEN: I'm looking at a picture
that's mostly trees. I don't know if you can see it. Is this
you were referring to?
That's Mr. Leonardis's house.
These shots were all taken from
m
H
STEVEN LEON
ACTING C
subject property.
Mr. Maggetti
ACTING CHAIR JENSEN:
t
the picture
to left lower
the house that
house and
O
RS a)
x
w •-I
0 r1
the project house, for lack
term. You have about a minute left if you'd
say anything
N
Cd
n
N
O
H _4j
H v
N
O E
U
0 '9
H
z7H�
a
V]
0 H
co
a
10 N m of o .4 N t•'1 W N 10 N O1 .4 N ('1 01 ul
.i .1 ri .-I rl -1 .i N N N N CV N
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. "Exceptions
be granted
standards
U)
E
0
4-a
constraints of
after carefully considering
the Applicant to
0
N
deviation. Major
ission. Major
or the Planning Co
c
is not considered by definition
0
rci
a1
C
0
0
01
standard and you can
a major exception, but
exception is justified by the
exception so
constraints of the site.
considered
issioner Micciche?
0
U
41
0
w
0'
that answer your
COMMISSIONER MICCICHE:
to close the
CHAIR JENSEN:
O
z
H
public portion of the hearing and
and make a motion.
to be to deny Architecture and
My motion is
Application
because there has been some preconceived
4i o
N
a)
rt
t1
0
0
N
r>,-.
z
0
H _
Ncn
04
H N
H �
N
OE
U N
zM
H
N
w
a 5 N
H
LOS GATOS
.i N r'1 T ul l0 N CO Ol .i N N d0 10 to NCO 01 .-1 N M d0 N
.i .i .i .i .i .i .i .-1 N N N N N N
COMMISSIONER MICCICHE:
01
C
v
v
U
O
}i
0
No, I'm proceeding. I'm
H
w
A
proceeding.
statement then?
statement to Marni
I made that
DAVID MAGETTI:
to be denied here
you believe that you're going
Well I was told I was being denied
O H
▪ H
to w
0
O
01
N Q
i
O n
cci
41
v
a
here tonight, but that I had
ACTING C
Mr. Maggetti.
Any other questions
that's what I was told by
DAVID MAGETTI:
your Staff.
clarify the
issioner Micciche's earlier
O
U
response to
44
0
✓
to
rv1
4)
1� N 01
rt
0 0 01
• w 0
si 3 H
• 0
N 0
c
to the Commission. This is at page
dl
0\
0
0
N
ci
O
H
N
H 0
H }1
OE
U N
U "1
H
a �
a5
w
cn"
O H
O
a
N co 61 H N Ol d0 ✓1 l0 N CO
H .i H .i .i .i .-1 .-i .i .-1 N N N • N ▪ N N
must be filed upstairs in the
Crl
0
O
0
N
rI
O �
z
04,
cn
� N
H a)
H
N
O
U N
Hz
a
a
a
mi'
O H
0
N
N
.-i N /•l d� l0 t00 00 .1 N /7 C N l9 (000H N d) N
rl ri ci ri rl ri .1 ri ri ri N N N N N N
that were presented
the things
looking at
because in
and in looking at the
considering
visited, and in
site, which I'm sure we've
been presented with a,
1) a)
.A R
O
N
0)
o
U R
aRi
) 4 G
3 ro
w H
3 .0
4-) a)
R )d .31
S-1 44 1�
o U
4 u) a)
3, :
s N v m
z w R -a
m 3
of proof on this issue with a compelling
standard. We have not heard,
from that
to deviate
should deviate
property, and
a second?
0
0
U
a)
N
H
ri
H
ISSIONER MICCICHE:
H
floor to
N
JJ
0
rl 1
rl 0
td -d
o U .)
ld
0 >
CES
O .0
-
m
0 O
0
o g
.
`O
0 td
w
a) a)
m m
issioner Micciche
CHAIR JENSEN:
the question?
there are. Anyone dissatisfied
a)
H
w
The appeal must be
d
.-1 N t`1 d0 co OO !` CO U r 00
N N